Evidence-Based Medicine in Theory and Practice: Epistemological and Normative Issues

  • Wendy RogersEmail author
  • Katrina Hutchison
Living reference work entry


Evidence-based medicine (EBM) emerged during the 1990s, with the aim of improving clinical practice by increasing the extent to which clinical care was informed by medical research, particularly randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of RCTs. This chapter gives an account of EBM, followed by examination of epistemological and ethical justifications and critiques of EBM. EBM relies upon epistemological claims about the ability of RCTs to eliminate certain forms of bias and to establish whether or not there is a causal relationship between an intervention and an outcome. However, epistemological critiques of EBM include reservations about whether EBM can “prove” causation, concerns about the rejection of mechanistic models of causation, challenges associated with applying the results of RCTs to individual patients, and lack of evidence regarding whether EBM has in fact benefitted patients and healthcare systems. The ethical justifications for EBM include its promise of better patient outcomes through better informed clinicians and the idea that public health policy based on EBM can support equity and minimize waste of resources. Ethical critiques of EBM note that despite its potential for reducing particular forms of bias, the research upon which EBM is based is often industry funded, creating conflicts of interest that are associated with new sources of bias. These include bias in the conduct of trials, the publication of results, and the choice of interventions for investigation. EBM also poses challenges for patient and clinician autonomy, especially where evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are enforced through targets or audits. In the face of these concerns, EBM is under pressure to reestablish its credibility. The chapter ends by identifying three current initiatives that seek to reinstate the aims of EBM to better inform healthcare decisions.


Research Evidence Mechanistic Reasoning Ethical Critique Ethical Justification Evidence Hierarchy 
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.


  1. AllTrials (2013) Missing trial data – briefing notes. . Accessed 20 Aug 2014
  2. AllTrials (2014) . Accessed 20 Aug 2014
  3. Assmann SF, Pocock SJ, Enos LE et al (2000) Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials. Lancet 355:1064–1069
  4. Bradford Hill A (1965) The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc R Soc Med 58(5):295–300
  5. Broadbent A (2013) Philosophy of epidemiology. Palgrave Macmillan, New York
  6. Burke M, Matlin S (eds) (2008) Monitoring financial flows for health research 2008. Geneva: Global Forum for Health Research.
  7. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination (1979) The periodic health examination. Can Med Assoc J 121:1193–1254
  8. Cartwright N (2010) What are randomised controlled trials good for? Philos Stud 147(1):59–70
  9. Cartwright N (2011) A philosopher’s view of the long road from RCTs to effectiveness. Lancet 377:1400–1401
  10. Charles C, Gafni A, Freeman E (2011) The evidence-based medicine model of clinical practice: scientific teaching or belief-based preaching? J Eval Clin Pract 17(4):597–605
  11. Cohen AM, Stavri PZ, Hersh WR (2004) A categorisation and analysis of the criticisms of evidence-based medicine. Int J Med Inform 73:35–43
  12. Davidoff F, Haynes B, Sackett D et al (1995) Evidence-based medicine. BMJ 310(6987):1085–1086
  13. De Vries R, Lemmens T (2006) The social and cultural shaping of medical evidence: case studies from pharmaceutical research and obstetric science. Soc Sci Med 62(11):2694–2706
  14. Djulbegovic B, Guyatt GH, Ashcroft RE (2009) Epistemologic inquiries in evidence-based medicine. Cancer Control 16(2):158–168
  15. Edwards A, Elwyn E (eds) (2001) Evidence-based patient choice: inevitable or impossible? Oxford University Press, Oxford
  16. Elliott C, Abadie R (2008) Exploiting a research underclass in phase 1 clinical trials. N Engl J Med 358(22):2316–2317
  17. Every-Palmer S, Howick J (2014) How evidence-based medicine is failing due to biased trials and selective publication. J Eval Clin Pract. doi:10.1111/jep.12147
  18. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group (1992) Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 268(17):2420–2425
  19. Goldacre B (2013) Are clinical trial data shared sufficiently today? No. BMJ 347:f1880
  20. Goodman KW (2003) Ethics and evidence-based medicine: fallibility and responsibility in clinical science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
  21. Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N (2014) Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ 348:g3725
  22. Gupta M (2003) A critical appraisal of evidence-based medicine: some ethical considerations. J Eval Clin Pract 9(2):111–121
  23. Guyatt G, Oxman A, Vist G et al (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336:924–926
  24. Hamburg MA, Collins FS (2010) The path to personalised medicine. N Engl J Med 363(4):301–304
  25. Hardaway RM (2004) Wound shock: a history of its study and treatment by military surgeons. Mil Med 169(4):265–269
  26. Hayes RB (2002) What kind of evidence is it that evidence-based medicine advocates want health care providers and consumers to pay attention to? BMC Health Serv Res 2(3). doi:10.1186/1472-6963-2-3
  27. Healy D, Cattell D (2003) Interface between authorship, industry and science in the domain of therapeutics. Br J Psychiatry 183:22–27
  28. Hope T (1995) Evidence based medicine and ethics. J Med Ethics 21(5):259–260
  29. Howick J (2011) The philosophy of evidence based medicine. Wiley Blackwell, Oxford
  30. Howick J, Glasziou P, Aronson JK (2013) Problems with using mechanisms to solve the problem of extrapolation. Theor Med Bioeth 34(4):275–291
  31. Hutchins LF, Unger JM, Crowley JJ et al (1999) Under representation of patients 65 years of age or older in cancer-treatment trials. N Engl J Med 341(27):2061–2067
  32. Johnson J, Rogers W (2014) Joint issues – conflicts of interest, the ASR hip and suggestions for managing surgical conflicts of interest. BMC Med Ethics 15:63. doi:10.1186/1472-6939-15-63
  33. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B et al (2003) Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality. BMJ 326:1167–1170
  34. Lillie EO, Patay B, Diamant J et al (2011) The n-of-1 clinical trial: the ultimate strategy for individualizing medicine? Pers Med 8(2):161–173
  35. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 339:332–336
  36. Murthy VH, Krumholz HM, Gross CP (2004) Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. JAMA 291(22):2720–2726
  37. OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group (2001/2010) Levels of evidence. Brit J Urol 105:155
  38. OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group (2011) The Oxford 2011 levels of evidence. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. . Accessed 11 Aug 2014
  39. Owen W, Szczech L, Frankenfield D (2002) Healthcare system interventions for inequality in quality: corrective action through evidence based medicine. J Natl Med Assoc 94:83S–91S
  40. Petryna A (2007) Clinical trials offshored: on private sector science and public health. BioSocieties 2:21–40
  41. Pocock SJ, Simon R (1975) Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics 31(1):103–115
  42. Rogers WA (2004) Evidence-based medicine and justice: a framework for looking at the impact of EBM on vulnerable or disadvantaged groups. J Med Ethics 30:141–145
  43. Rogers WA, Ballantyne AJ (2009) Justice in health research: what is the role of evidence-based medicine? Perspect Biol Med 52(2):188–202
  44. Rosenberg W, Donald A (1995) Evidence based medicine: an approach to clinical problem-solving. BMJ 310(6987):1122–1126
  45. Sackett DL (1989) Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest 95(2 Suppl):2S–4S
  46. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM et al (1996) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312(7023):71–72
  47. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D (2010) CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 152(11):726–732
  48. Sehon SR, Stanley DE (2003) A philosophical analysis of the evidence-based medicine debate. BMC Health Serv Res 3:1–10
  49. Tallon D, Chard J, Dieppe P (2000) Relation between agendas of the research community and the research consumer. Lancet 355:2037–2040
  50. Topol EJ (2004) Failing the public health – rofecoxib, merck, and the FDA. N Engl J Med 351(17):1707–1709
  51. Trouiller P, Olliaro P, Torreele E et al (2002) Drug development for neglected diseases: a deficient market and a public-health policy failure. Lancet 359(9324):2188–2194
  52. Worrall J (2007) Why there’s no cause to randomize. Br J Philos Sci 58:451–488
  53. Worrall J (2011) Causality in medicine: getting back to the hill top. Prev Med 53:235–238
  54. Wyer PC, Silva SA (2009) Where is the wisdom? I – a conceptual history of evidence-based medicine. J Eval Clin Pract 15(6):891–898

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and Department of Clinical MedicineMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations