Advertisement

Physicians’ Daily Life and the Scientific Method

  • Ton J. Cleophas
  • Aeilko H. Zwinderman
Chapter

Abstract

Physicians’ daily life largely consists of routine, with little need for discussion. However, there are questions physicians simply do not know the answer of. Some will look for the opinions of their colleagues or the experts in the field. Others will try and find a way out by guessing what might be the best solution. The benefit of the doubt doctrine (Ordronaux 1869) is often used as a justification for unproven treatment decisions, and, if things went wrong, another justification is the expression: clinical medicine is an error-ridden activity (Paget 1990). So far, few physicians have followed a different approach, the scientific method. The scientific method is, in a nutshell: reformulate your question into a hypothesis and try to test this hypothesis against control observations. In clinical settings this approach is not impossible, but rarely applied by physicians, despite their lengthy education in evidence based medicine, which is almost entirely based on the scientific method. This chapter was written to give simple examples of how the scientific method can be implied in a physician’s daily life, and to explain its advantages and limitations. We do hope that this chapter will stimulate physicians to more often apply the scientific method for a better outline of their patients’ best possible treatment options.

Keywords

Evidence Base Medicine Scientific Method Informed Consent Procedure Control Observation Pharmaceutical Representative 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Anonymous (2001) Beds in hospital, nursing homes and home health care. Drugs Health Prod (May issue):2–6Google Scholar
  2. BUGS y WinBUGS. http://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/bugs. Accessed 15 Dec 2011
  3. Cleophas TJ, Zwinderman AH, Cleophas TF (2002) In: Cleophas TJ (ed) Statistics applied to clinical trials: self-assessment book. Kluwer, BostonGoogle Scholar
  4. Lambert V (1992) Improving safety, reducing use. FDA Consum (October issue):1–5Google Scholar
  5. Ordronaux J (1869) The jurisprudence of medicine in relation to the law of contracts, torts and evidence. The Lawbook Exchange, LTD, Clark, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  6. Paget MA (1990) The unity of mistakes, a phenomenological interpretation of medical work. Contemp Sociol 19:118–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. S-plus. http://www.mathsoft.com/splus. Accessed 15 Dec 2011
  8. SPSS Statistical Software. http://www.spss.com. Accessed 15 Dec 2011
  9. StatsDirect. http://www.camcode.com. Accessed 15 Dec 2011
  10. True Epistat. http://ic.net/∼biomware/biohp2te.htm. Accessed 15 Dec 2011

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ton J. Cleophas
    • 1
    • 2
  • Aeilko H. Zwinderman
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Applied to Clinical TrialsEuropean Interuniversity College of Pharmaceutical MedicineLyonFrance
  2. 2.Department of MedicineAlbert Schweitzer HospitalDordrechtNetherlands
  3. 3.Department of Biostatistics and EpidemiologyAcademic Medical CenterAmsterdamNetherlands

Personalised recommendations