TY - JOUR
T1 - Toward a Transdisciplinary Model of Evidence-Based Practice
AU - Satterfield, Jason M.
AU - Spring, Bonnie
AU - Brownson, Ross C.
AU - Mullen, Edward J.
AU - Newhouse, Robin P.
AU - Walker, Barbara B.
AU - Whitlock, Evelyn P.
PY - 2009/6
Y1 - 2009/6
N2 - Context: This article describes the historical context and current developments in evidence-based practice (EBP) for medicine, nursing, psychology, social work, and public health, as well as the evolution of the seminal "three circles" model of evidence-based medicine, highlighting changes in EBP content, processes, and philosophies across disciplines. Methods: The core issues and challenges in EBP are identified by comparing and contrasting EBP models across various health disciplines. Then a unified, transdisciplinary EBP model is presented, drawing on the strengths and compensating for the weaknesses of each discipline. Findings: Common challenges across disciplines include (1) how "evidence" should be defined and comparatively weighted; (2) how and when the patient's and/or other contextual factors should enter the clinical decision-making process; (3) the definition and role of the "expert"; and (4) what other variables should be considered when selecting an evidence-based practice, such as age, social class, community resources, and local expertise. Conclusions: A unified, transdisciplinary EBP model would address historical shortcomings by redefining the contents of each model circle, clarifying the practitioner's expertise and competencies, emphasizing shared decision making, and adding both environmental and organizational contexts. Implications for academia, practice, and policy also are discussed.
AB - Context: This article describes the historical context and current developments in evidence-based practice (EBP) for medicine, nursing, psychology, social work, and public health, as well as the evolution of the seminal "three circles" model of evidence-based medicine, highlighting changes in EBP content, processes, and philosophies across disciplines. Methods: The core issues and challenges in EBP are identified by comparing and contrasting EBP models across various health disciplines. Then a unified, transdisciplinary EBP model is presented, drawing on the strengths and compensating for the weaknesses of each discipline. Findings: Common challenges across disciplines include (1) how "evidence" should be defined and comparatively weighted; (2) how and when the patient's and/or other contextual factors should enter the clinical decision-making process; (3) the definition and role of the "expert"; and (4) what other variables should be considered when selecting an evidence-based practice, such as age, social class, community resources, and local expertise. Conclusions: A unified, transdisciplinary EBP model would address historical shortcomings by redefining the contents of each model circle, clarifying the practitioner's expertise and competencies, emphasizing shared decision making, and adding both environmental and organizational contexts. Implications for academia, practice, and policy also are discussed.
KW - Clinical decision making
KW - Evidence-based practice
KW - Transdisciplinary practice
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=66849087495&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=66849087495&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00561.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00561.x
M3 - Review article
C2 - 19523122
AN - SCOPUS:66849087495
SN - 0887-378X
VL - 87
SP - 368
EP - 390
JO - Milbank Quarterly
JF - Milbank Quarterly
IS - 2
ER -