Ethics and EBM: acknowledging bias, accepting difference and embracing politics
Identifieur interne : 000970 ( Main/Exploration ); précédent : 000969; suivant : 000971Ethics and EBM: acknowledging bias, accepting difference and embracing politics
Auteurs : Ian Kerridge [Australie]Source :
- Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice [ 1356-1294 ] ; 2010-04.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
Abstract
Evidence‐based medicine (EBM) has been effective because it confers both epistemic and moral authority, promising that both individual patient care and public health interventions are effective, safe and efficient, that these decisions and standards can be determined (and therefore judged) in a transparent manner and that this form of decision making is reliable, objective and value‐free. The problem is that EBM refers to particular, ideologically and philosophically specific concepts of evidence, medicine and the relationship between them. The analysis of the ‘ethics’ of EBM, therefore, requires not only a critique of its philosophical naïvety and its attachment to modernism and positivism, but a critique of its social, cultural and political implications.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01412.x
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: 002E03
- to stream Istex, to step Curation: 002942
- to stream Istex, to step Checkpoint: 000475
- to stream Main, to step Merge: 000973
- to stream Main, to step Curation: 000970
Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Ethics and EBM: acknowledging bias, accepting difference and embracing politics</title><author><name sortKey="Kerridge, Ian" sort="Kerridge, Ian" uniqKey="Kerridge I" first="Ian" last="Kerridge">Ian Kerridge</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:0CCC28EF23F42FFB0DCB0D2B9BE6BFC463C1A989</idno><date when="2010" year="2010">2010</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01412.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/0CCC28EF23F42FFB0DCB0D2B9BE6BFC463C1A989/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">002E03</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">002942</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">000475</idno><idno type="wicri:doubleKey">1356-1294:2010:Kerridge I:ethics:and:ebm</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">000973</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">000970</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Exploration">000970</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Ethics and EBM: acknowledging bias, accepting difference and embracing politics</title><author><name sortKey="Kerridge, Ian" sort="Kerridge, Ian" uniqKey="Kerridge I" first="Ian" last="Kerridge">Ian Kerridge</name><affiliation wicri:level="1"><country xml:lang="fr">Australie</country><wicri:regionArea>Associate Professor, Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales</wicri:regionArea><wicri:noRegion>New South Wales</wicri:noRegion></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice</title><idno type="ISSN">1356-1294</idno><idno type="eISSN">1365-2753</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2010-04">2010-04</date><biblScope unit="volume">16</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="365">365</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="373">373</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">1356-1294</idno></series><idno type="istex">0CCC28EF23F42FFB0DCB0D2B9BE6BFC463C1A989</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01412.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">JEP1412</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1356-1294</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>difference</term><term>ethics</term><term>evidence‐based medicine</term><term>ideology</term><term>judgement</term><term>politics</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Evidence‐based medicine (EBM) has been effective because it confers both epistemic and moral authority, promising that both individual patient care and public health interventions are effective, safe and efficient, that these decisions and standards can be determined (and therefore judged) in a transparent manner and that this form of decision making is reliable, objective and value‐free. The problem is that EBM refers to particular, ideologically and philosophically specific concepts of evidence, medicine and the relationship between them. The analysis of the ‘ethics’ of EBM, therefore, requires not only a critique of its philosophical naïvety and its attachment to modernism and positivism, but a critique of its social, cultural and political implications.</div></front></TEI><affiliations><list><country><li>Australie</li></country></list><tree><country name="Australie"><noRegion><name sortKey="Kerridge, Ian" sort="Kerridge, Ian" uniqKey="Kerridge I" first="Ian" last="Kerridge">Ian Kerridge</name></noRegion></country></tree></affiliations></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Musique/explor/MozartV1/Data/Main/Exploration
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000970 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 000970 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Musique
|area= MozartV1
|flux= Main
|étape= Exploration
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:0CCC28EF23F42FFB0DCB0D2B9BE6BFC463C1A989
|texte= Ethics and EBM: acknowledging bias, accepting difference and embracing politics
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.20. |  |