The ongoing evidence debate: Time to decide

Wounds UK

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 12-14

  Grocott, Patricia ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; EDITORIAL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; METHODOLOGY; NURSE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; PHYSICIAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); TREATMENT OUTCOME; WOUND CARE;

EID: 78650721448     PISSN: 17466814     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Editorial

References (8)

1. Gottrup F, Apelqvist J, Price P (2010) Outcomes in controlled and comparative studies on non-healing wounds: recommendations to improve the quality of evidence in wound management. J Wound Care 19(6): 237-68
2. Gottrup F (2008) Evidence controversy in wound management. BMJ Rapid Responses. 3 March, 2008
3. Grocott P, Campling N (2009) A methodology for evaluating wound care technologies in the context of treatment and care. Eur Wound Management Assoc J 9: 27-38
4. Medical Research Council (MRC) Developing and evaluating complex interventions: new guidance (2008). MRC, London. Available online at: www.mrc. ac.uk/Utilities/Documentrecord/index. htm?d=MRC004871
5. Nelson A (2008) Improving care: the power of the pen. J Wound Care 19(9): 368
6. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Muir Gray JA, Haynes BR, Richardson WS (1996) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. Br Med J 312: 71
7. White R, Jeffery S (2010) The evidence debate in wound care: is patient welfare an issue? Wounds UK 6(3): 10
8. White R, Maylor M, Iverson C (2010) Evidence is 'in', ignorance is 'out': a dilemma for wound care products. Wounds UK 6(3): 114-6