Biography
Biography: Surena Vahabi
Abstract
Objectives: Evidence-based decision making implies the practice of dentistry in a sophisticated way in patient care. The aims of this presentation were first to define and evaluate types of scientific evidence; second, to classify some guidelines for a simplified evidence based decision making for both general dentist & specialist and show what exactly the inspiring forces for a misleading result are.
Methods: This is a theoretical discussion which explores the nature and validity of evidence from an Expert opinion to meta-analysis within the EBD framework. Uncertainty of statistical evidence, pitfalls of authority statements and decision making, low reproducibility rate, multiple bias and poor interpretation are the topics that is being explained to contribute to the uncertainty surrounding use of traditional medicine.
Results: Philosophy of EBD privileges different level of evidence as compared with traditional practice. An alternative ontology of evidence is provided; however evidence is usually depicted according to a pyramid, where higher levels on the pyramid represent higher levels of evidence, which in turn indicates a lower risk for bias.
Conclusions: This lecture suggests that EBD uses a staged evidence and a naive conception of the relationships between evidence and practice. The current amount of evidence is limited in respect of both the functionality of EBD, and its inherent scientific processes.
Finally, when there are no clinical practice guidelines, critical summaries, or systematic reviews on your topic of interest, it is highly demanded to look for our own personal research to answer our clinical question, however, level of evidence should be considered all the time.