IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Theory Based Medicine and the Role of Evidence: Why the Emperor Needs New Clothes, Again

Listed author(s):
  • Mita Giacomini


    (Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University)

Registered author(s):

    The evidence based medicine movement ("EBM") was established to combat capricious reasoning in clinical care, particularly arguments from authority. Critique of authority and appraisal of evidence remain EBM's core values, and should be revisited in this current era of EBM's maturity and considerable influence. At this stage, we encounter a new form of under-questioned authority: evidence from well-designed and methodically appraised RCTs. RCT evidence is now prized even on some occasions when it is incapable of providing meaningful information - in particular, when underlying casual theory is inscrutable. This is the case with many health interventions whose mechanisms remain "black boxes" without compelling explanations. A review of recent clinical trials of remote intercessory prayer illustrates this problem. The findings of these trials are uninterpretable and inapplicable, due to unresolved and fundamental theoretical problems with their hypotheses and premises. Yet this trial evidence has gained remarkable scientific credibility and high profile dissemination, largely on the warrant of rigorous RCT methodology. The case of remote intercessory prayer evidence helps to identify some systematic blind spots in the institutions of EBM. As EBM has long counselled, clinicians and policy makers should indeed be sceptical of casual arguments in the absence of empirical evidence. However, empirical evidence in the absence of good casual argument is likewise occasion for scepticism. Medicine - even evidence-based medicine - is theory-based at its core. EBM must cultivate greater capacity to address the crucial role of theory, in both the generation and the use of experimental evidence.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: Fourth version, 2009
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada in its series Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper Series with number 2009-02.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 2009
    Handle: RePEc:hpa:wpaper:200902
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    CRL Building, 282, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1

    Phone: (905) 525-9140, extension 22122
    Fax: (905) 546-5211
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hpa:wpaper:200902. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lyn Sauberli)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.