Key result
The editorial discusses the challenges of using appropriateness criteria for medical procedures in clinical practice when conclusive evidence from randomized trials is lacking.
Discusses the readiness and application of appropriateness criteria for medical procedures in clinical practice.
Every day, physicians must decide whether to recommend medical procedures that may benefit their patients, such as coronary revascularization for a patient with angina, hysterectomy for a patient with dysfunctional uterine bleeding, or carotid endarterectomy for a patient with transient neurologic symptoms. How should physicians make these judgments? Ideally, one would like conclusive evidence, such as the results of randomized clinical trials, regarding the balance between the benefits of the procedure and the harm it may cause. Unfortunately, even in the case of procedures that have been the subject of numerous randomized clinical trials, such as coronary revascularization and carotid . . .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paul G Shekelle (2001) reported an editorial. Appropriateness Criteria was evaluated. The editorial discusses the challenges of using appropriateness criteria for medical procedures in clinical practice when conclusive evidence from randomized trials is lacking.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: