By 
Whether published in a medical journal or in the media, all research should be critically examined. Only in this way can their quality and relevance be validated. This is the only way to analyze and eliminate studies that are influenced by a number of factors such as: funding body pressure or inadequate research methodologies.
The Results for You
As a result, the medical staff either does not have access to the results of research relevant to them, or needs special skills to establish their validity and quality.
Precisely the huge amount of research and scientific articles published worldwide, which makes it virtually impossible to find all the results relevant to certain clinical circumstances, the limited time available for the study and search for the best information, the cost of obtaining them, and variable data, and often, contradictions from different sources have led to the emergence of pharmaceutical value based selling (VBM).
Clinical guidelines or guidelines, which are a fundamental element of VBM, contain recommendations for good medical practice for specific clinical circumstances. They aim to build an ever closer and more accessible link between scientific research and medical practice. Specifically, it provides recommendations based on a critical evaluation of existing research that has become reliable, as it has been subject to analysis, both internally and externally.
What is meant by “Medicine based on scientific value or value of efficacy”?
Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) is a relatively recent and significantly different approach from that historically used in healthcare. Conceptually, EBM is based on three principles: best scientific value, clinical experience, patient values and expectations.
- First, the optimal process for making a clinical decision requires knowledge of the best available scientific value. This cannot come from the report of a single clinical case, but from complex studies with careful planning and sophisticated data analysis tools.
- At the top of what is called the “pyramid of value” are systematic reviews of the literature, that is, rigorous summaries of all the studies present. Furthermore, value-based medicine suggests how much scientific certainty must be integrated with the physician’s individual clinical experience. The role of the physician therefore remains central in this new approach. Finally, value alone is never enough to make a clinical decision.
Any medical choice must always take into consideration the patient’s values and preferences. The latter is not only involved in the choice of treatment, but can also be part of research projects, for example in identifying research priorities and disseminating the results of studies to the public.
Conclusion
Doctors have always thought their decisions were based on value; therefore, the current term “value-based medicine” may be misleading. However, for many physicians, “the value” is often a vague combination of strategies that have proven effective in previous patients, advice given by teachers and colleagues, and a general impression of “what has been done” from journal articles.
Comments