Ethical and epistemological foundations for randomized evidence in neurosurgery - 04/11/23
Doi : 10.1016/j.neuchi.2023.101507
Aaron Lawson McLean ⁎ 
Department of Neurosurgery, Jena University Hospital – Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany
⁎Corresponding author.
Highlights |
• | The incorporation of a robust epistemological framework enables clinicians to reconcile randomized evidence with individual case complexities, enhancing both the scientific rigor and ethical soundness of medical judgments. |
• | The work emphasizes the need for a sustained dialogue to address the schism between evidence-based practice and the lived experiences of clinical uncertainty, advocating for an interdisciplinary approach involving educational curricula, professional ethics, and public discourse. |
• | The concept of 'narrative coherence' is introduced as a new avenue for understanding clinical reasoning, suggesting that it could inform educational curricula and offer a more nuanced understanding of how clinicians navigate the ambiguities inherent in their field. |
Keywords : Clinical decision-making, Medical ethics, Randomized controlled trials, Treatment allocation, Uncertainty
Plan
© 2023
Elsevier Masson SAS. Tous droits réservés.
Vol 70 - N° 1
Article 101507- janvier 2024 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Modified orbitozygomatic craniotomy with a single burr hole in the alternative sphenoid ridge keyhole
- Semyon A. Melchenko, Grigorii E. Golodnev, Vasiliy A. Cherekaev, Albert A. Sufianov, Marat R. Gizatullin, Denis A. Golbin, Nikolay V. Lasunin, Ivan S. Sheliagin, Artem A. Surikov, Ilya V. Senko
- Super acute subdural hematoma following drain removal for chronic subdural haematoma
- Charles Champeaux Depond, Dahmane El Hairech, Philippe Metellus
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?