Talk:Evidence-based medicine/Draft: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger
mNo edit summary
imported>Nancy Sculerati
No edit summary
Line 10: Line 10:
|                  by = [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 16:38, 9 March 2007 (CST); [[User:Supten Sarbadhikari|Supten]]
|                  by = [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 16:38, 9 March 2007 (CST); [[User:Supten Sarbadhikari|Supten]]
}}
}}
I will be gad to help author here, and would like to go over a plan for the article. I think that, as this article covers a a special sort of medical field that we should discuss "audience". Please, fellow editors, argue with any of these points if they differ from your understanding. Evidence based medicine is certainly all about clinical care of patients- but, unlike an article on dermatology, say, it really is about a way of thinking about medicine, an approach. Reading what is written so far- it is really meaty and presents that approach, but, in my mind suffers from 2 faults, one is that there is too much technical language without explanation, and (2) the history of medicine (in a way) has to be presented so that the naive reader understands that actually, "regualar medicine" is ''not'' evidenced based. I tyhink also, that including some real examples of changes in clinical practice that are based on evidence based medicine, may be helpful. I am going to add some of this and am open to discussion, especially from Supten. [[User:Nancy Sculerati|Nancy Sculerati]] 09:35, 15 May 2007 (CDT)

Revision as of 08:35, 15 May 2007


Article Checklist for "Evidence-based medicine/Draft"
Workgroup category or categories Health Sciences Workgroup [Categories OK]
Article status Stub: no more than a few sentences
Underlinked article? Yes
Basic cleanup done? Yes
Checklist last edited by Larry Sanger 16:38, 9 March 2007 (CST); Supten

To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.






I will be gad to help author here, and would like to go over a plan for the article. I think that, as this article covers a a special sort of medical field that we should discuss "audience". Please, fellow editors, argue with any of these points if they differ from your understanding. Evidence based medicine is certainly all about clinical care of patients- but, unlike an article on dermatology, say, it really is about a way of thinking about medicine, an approach. Reading what is written so far- it is really meaty and presents that approach, but, in my mind suffers from 2 faults, one is that there is too much technical language without explanation, and (2) the history of medicine (in a way) has to be presented so that the naive reader understands that actually, "regualar medicine" is not evidenced based. I tyhink also, that including some real examples of changes in clinical practice that are based on evidence based medicine, may be helpful. I am going to add some of this and am open to discussion, especially from Supten. Nancy Sculerati 09:35, 15 May 2007 (CDT)