Can evidence-based medicine and clinical quality improvement learn from each other?

Paul Glasziou, Greg Ogrinc, Steve Goodman

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleResearchpeer-review

68 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The considerable gap between what we know from research and what is done in clinical practice is well known. Proposed responses include the Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) and Clinical Quality Improvement. EBM has focused more on 'doing the right things' - based on external research evidence - whereas Quality Improvement (QI) has focused more on 'doing things right' - based on local processes. However, these are complementary and in combination direct us how to 'do the right things right'. This article examines the differences and similarities in the two approaches and proposes that by integrating the bedside application, the methodological development and the training of these complementary disciplines both would gain.

Original languageEnglish
JournalBMJ Quality and Safety
Volume20
Issue numberSUPPL. 1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2011

Fingerprint

Evidence-Based Medicine
Quality Improvement
Research

Cite this

@article{269fcd8cf3734990ad7ed101da037dea,
title = "Can evidence-based medicine and clinical quality improvement learn from each other?",
abstract = "The considerable gap between what we know from research and what is done in clinical practice is well known. Proposed responses include the Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) and Clinical Quality Improvement. EBM has focused more on 'doing the right things' - based on external research evidence - whereas Quality Improvement (QI) has focused more on 'doing things right' - based on local processes. However, these are complementary and in combination direct us how to 'do the right things right'. This article examines the differences and similarities in the two approaches and proposes that by integrating the bedside application, the methodological development and the training of these complementary disciplines both would gain.",
author = "Paul Glasziou and Greg Ogrinc and Steve Goodman",
year = "2011",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1136/bmjqs.2010.046524",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
journal = "Quality and Safety in Health Care",
issn = "1475-3898",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "SUPPL. 1",

}

Can evidence-based medicine and clinical quality improvement learn from each other? / Glasziou, Paul; Ogrinc, Greg; Goodman, Steve.

In: BMJ Quality and Safety, Vol. 20, No. SUPPL. 1, 04.2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Can evidence-based medicine and clinical quality improvement learn from each other?

AU - Glasziou, Paul

AU - Ogrinc, Greg

AU - Goodman, Steve

PY - 2011/4

Y1 - 2011/4

N2 - The considerable gap between what we know from research and what is done in clinical practice is well known. Proposed responses include the Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) and Clinical Quality Improvement. EBM has focused more on 'doing the right things' - based on external research evidence - whereas Quality Improvement (QI) has focused more on 'doing things right' - based on local processes. However, these are complementary and in combination direct us how to 'do the right things right'. This article examines the differences and similarities in the two approaches and proposes that by integrating the bedside application, the methodological development and the training of these complementary disciplines both would gain.

AB - The considerable gap between what we know from research and what is done in clinical practice is well known. Proposed responses include the Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) and Clinical Quality Improvement. EBM has focused more on 'doing the right things' - based on external research evidence - whereas Quality Improvement (QI) has focused more on 'doing things right' - based on local processes. However, these are complementary and in combination direct us how to 'do the right things right'. This article examines the differences and similarities in the two approaches and proposes that by integrating the bedside application, the methodological development and the training of these complementary disciplines both would gain.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79957989309&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjqs.2010.046524

DO - 10.1136/bmjqs.2010.046524

M3 - Review article

VL - 20

JO - Quality and Safety in Health Care

JF - Quality and Safety in Health Care

SN - 1475-3898

IS - SUPPL. 1

ER -