HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Stein, N. D Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Stein, N. D

Letter

West Hartford, Connecticut, USA

Key Words: evidence-based medicine

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The editorial "Misunderstandings, misperceptions, and mistakes"¹ points out that evidence-based medicine (EBM) can be very useful to clinicians, researchers, and policy makers. In my experience, EBM is very useful but too often it is misapplied. Often, the latest study is hailed as a "landmark" study and held up as the standard of care. Then, it is used as a cudgel with which to beat the clinician into using the treatment supported by the latest study. I call this problem the "tyranny of the latest study."

EBM compares published studies. Valuable information found in clinical experience may be left out of the analysis. Often, publication bias is not considered. This type of bias may manifest itself in a subtle, and sometimes undetectable, fashion. Some information is not submitted for publication. Sometimes, invalid data are recanted well after the study is published. The sponsor of the research may not want to share . . . [Full text of this article]