Evidence-Based Medicine: Feminist Criticisms and Implications for Women's Health.
evidence-based medicine
feminism
feminist epistemologies
philosophy of medicine
women's health
Journal
Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)
ISSN: 2688-4844
Titre abrégé: Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101768931
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
accepted:
08
08
2022
entrez:
7
11
2022
pubmed:
8
11
2022
medline:
8
11
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Evidence-based medicine (EBM) dates back to 19th-century Paris and started out as a new paradigm for practicing medicine, with the aim of replacing anecdote with high-quality evidence from positivist-style research. Despite the clear logic underpinning EBM, there have been numerous criticisms, including maintenance of an archaic view of evidence as "facts," failure to acknowledge that all research is underpinned by the beliefs of the researcher, and the simple fact that medical research has historically been androcentric and results generalized to female patients. In this essay, we discuss the criticisms of EBM, with a focus on feminist critiques based on three central feminist epistemologies: feminist empiricism, standpoint theory, and social constructivism. We argue that EBM potentially perpetuates gaps in women's health and advocate for incorporating feminist epistemologies into future medical research to garner further understanding of social influences on women's health. In addition, we argue that EBM may degrade the clinical acumen and that critical thinking should become a key component of medical school curricula.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36340479
doi: 10.1089/whr.2022.0032
pii: 10.1089/whr.2022.0032
pmc: PMC9629975
doi:
Types de publication
Editorial
Langues
eng
Pagination
844-849Informations de copyright
© Lea Merone et al., 2022; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
No competing financial interests exist.
Références
Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle). 2022 Sep 12;3(1):759-767
pubmed: 36185072
BMJ. 2014 Jun 13;348:g3725
pubmed: 24927763
BMJ. 1996 Jan 13;312(7023):71-2
pubmed: 8555924
J Hist Biol. 1976 Fall;9(2):183-213
pubmed: 11610065
J R Soc Med. 2011 Dec;104(12):510-20
pubmed: 22179294
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Jun;62(11):2621-32
pubmed: 16384628
Acad Emerg Med. 2008 May;15(5):414-8
pubmed: 18439195
CMAJ. 2000 Oct 3;163(7):837-41
pubmed: 11033714
Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2015 Dec;36(6):870-7
pubmed: 26595047
Am J Med. 2017 Nov;130(11):1246-1250
pubmed: 28711551
J Evid Based Med. 2017 Nov;10(4):287-292
pubmed: 28452179
Vox Sang. 2002 Aug;83 Suppl 1:383-6
pubmed: 12749371
QJM. 2003 Jan;96(1):1-5
pubmed: 12509644
J R Soc Med. 2007 Jan;100(1):2-3
pubmed: 17197669
Fam Pract. 2008 Dec;25(6):400-13
pubmed: 18842618
BMC Womens Health. 2015 Oct 26;15:94
pubmed: 26503700
Soc Sci Med. 2004 Sep;59(5):1059-69
pubmed: 15186905
Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 1994;7(7):14-7
pubmed: 10140847
Endocr Pract. 2009 Sep-Oct;15(6):573-9
pubmed: 19491062
Lancet. 1999 Feb 27;353(9154):743-6
pubmed: 10073531
J Med Ethics. 2004 Apr;30(2):119
pubmed: 15082800
J Eval Clin Pract. 2014 Dec;20(6):921-7
pubmed: 25406418
Cureus. 2020 Oct 10;12(10):e10881
pubmed: 33178533
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2021 Oct;45(5):424-426
pubmed: 34181298
Scand Cardiovasc J. 2017 Dec;51(6):299-307
pubmed: 29029561
Acad Med. 2010 Jun;85(6):945-6
pubmed: 20505391
Medwave. 2020 Apr 30;20(3):e7887
pubmed: 32428925
Evid Based Med. 2016 Aug;21(4):123-5
pubmed: 27325531
Am J Med. 1997 Dec;103(6):529-35
pubmed: 9428837
J Health Polit Policy Law. 1994 Winter;19(4):773-99
pubmed: 7860968