Evidence-based practice, or EBP, is clinical practice in which patient management decisions are consistent with the principles of evidence-based health care. This means that decisions will be, first of all, consistent with the best evidence about the benefits and downsides of the alternative management strategies. Second, decisions will be consistent with the values and preferences of the individual patient.
Evidence-informed practice, or EIP, encompass a broader scope than evidence-based practices; EIP addresses multiple goals simultaneously while offering greater flexibility regarding evidence sources in order to meet various goals, including best practices, cultural context, and patient needs.
Grand Challenges for Social Work and Society by 
|
Meta-analysis |
Quantitative summary of results which may be included in a systematic review. |
|
Systematic review |
Article in which the authors have systematically searched for, appraised, and summarized all of the medical literature for a specific topic. |
|
Critically appraised topic |
Short summary of an article from the literature, created to answer a specific clinical question. |
|
Guidance or guidelines |
Statements that include recommendations intended to optimize patient care, informed by review of evidence and an assessment of the benefits and costs of alternative care options. |
|
Randomized controlled clinical trial |
Group of patients is randomized into an experimental group and a control group. These groups are followed up for the variables/outcomes of interest. |
|
Cohort study |
Involves the identification of two groups (cohorts) of patients, one which did receive the exposure of interest, and one which did not, and following these cohorts forward for the outcome of interest. |
|
Case-control study |
Involves identifying patients who have the outcome of interest (cases) and control patients without different outcomes, comparing to see if they had the exposure of interest. |
|
Type of question |
Definition |
Best type of study/research design |
|
Therapy* |
Determining the effect of interventions on patients |
RCT |
|
Diagnosis |
Establishing the power of a test to differentiate between those with and without a target condition or disease |
Prospective, blind comparison to a gold standard** |
|
Harm / Etiology |
Ascertaining the effects of potentially harmful agents |
Cohort or case control |
|
Prognosis |
Estimating a patient’s likely course over time due to factors other than interventions |
Cohort study |
|
Prevention* |
Reducing the chance of disease by identifying and modifying risk factors, or diagnosing early through screening |
RCT |
|
Clinical examination |
Gathering and interpreting findings from the history and physical examination |
Prospective, blind comparison to a gold standard** |
|
Cost analysis |
Comparing the cost and consequences of different treatments and tests |
Economic analysis |
|
Point of view |
Patient experience or concerns |
Qualitative study |
* Questions of therapy and prevention that can be best answered by a RCT can also be answered by a meta-analysis or systematic review.
** A controlled trial that looks at patients with varying degrees of an illness and administers both diagnostic tests (the test under investigation and the “gold standard” test) to all of the patients in the study group.
Source: Kysh, L. (2013). What's in a name? The difference between a systematic review and a literature review and why it matters. University of Southern California, Norris Medical Library. http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.766364
176 Central Drive
Cullowhee, NC 28723
Administration: 828-227-7485
Reference: 828-227-7465
Circulation: 828-227-7485
