Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Advocating for evidence-informed decisions to make healthcare fit for each person
  1. Juan Victor Ariel Franco1,2,
  2. Kerry Dwan3,
  3. Luis Ignacio Garegnani4,
  4. Marleen Kunneman5,6,
  5. Eva Madrid7,
  6. Maria-Inti Metzendorf2,
  7. Nicolás Meza7,
  8. David Nunan8,
  9. Georgia C Richards8,9,
  10. Paula Riganti10,11,
  11. Areti Angeliki Veroniki12,13
  1. 1 BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, London, UK
  2. 2 Institute of General Practice, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-Universitat Dusseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
  3. 3 Methods Support Unit, Evidence, Production and Methods Directorate, Cochrane, London, UK
  4. 4 Research Department, Instituto Universitario del Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  5. 5 Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
  6. 6 Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
  7. 7 Interdisciplinary Centre for Health Studies (CIESAL), Cochrane Chile Associate Centre, Universidad de Valparaiso, Viña del Mar, Chile
  8. 8 Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  9. 9 Global Centre on Healthcare and Urbanisation, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  10. 10 The University of British Columbia Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
  11. 11 Family and Community Medicine Division, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  12. 12 Knowledge Translation Program, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  13. 13 Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Dr Juan Victor Ariel Franco, BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, London WC1H 9JR, UK; juanfranco{at}bmj.com

Statistics from Altmetric.com

A year has passed since we have joined the new editorial team of BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM), a journal initially launched in 1995. Since then, great editors have maintained a platform for EBM enthusiasts and advocates. First commentaries and then EBM verdicts critically summarised the latest evidence with important implications for clinical practice. During the last 4 years, the journal incorporated original research and other articles that aimed to promote debate and analysis of the current controversies related to evidence.

For this new phase, we invited an international editorial team considering geographical, gender, ethnic, seniority and other forms of diversity. Most of our editors, including the Editor-in-Chief, are not native English-speakers. Considering the existing barriers and inequalities in publishing for authors, we advocate and engage in minimising conscious and unconscious biases, this being part of this larger endeavour towards justice, equality, diversity and inclusion by the BMJ.1

At the end of a very remarkable 2021, facing the beginning of 2022 puts several challenges at stake: …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Twitter @dwan_kerry, @MarleenKunneman, @mintimetz, @nicolasmezac, @dnunan79, @Richards_G_C, @paula_riganti, @AVeroniki

  • Contributors All authors wrote, revised and approved this manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.