Saturday, November 20, 2010
The specialty of Infectious Diseases: More art than science?
The November 15 issue of Clinical Infectious Diseases has an interesting paper that evaluates the quality of the IDSA clinical practice guielines. The authors reviewed 44 current guidelines available at the time of the study, which consisted of 4,182 component recommendations. Over half (55%) of the recommendations were based on level III evidence (expert opinion or descriptive studies), and only 15% were based on level I evidence (at least 1 randomized controlled trial). Of note, when revised guidelines were compared to their corresponding original versions, there was a 12% relative increase in recommendations backed by level I evidence, though that was only a 1.6% absolute increase. Just goes to show you that infectious diseases is still in its infancy as a specialty and the unknown remains vast. This must be why I often feel like I am flying by the seat of my pants.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
OSHA! OSHA! OSHA!
In many parts of the country, as rates of COVID-19 are declining and vaccination coverage is increasing (albeit with substantial variati...
-
In many parts of the country, as rates of COVID-19 are declining and vaccination coverage is increasing (albeit with substantial variati... -
This is a guest post by Jorge Salinas, MD, Hospital Epidemiologist at the University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics. There is virtually no...
-
I’m surprised that we can’t stop arguing about the modes of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, despite the fact that most experts (including our frie...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for submitting your comment to the Controversies blog. To reduce spam, all comments will be reviewed by the blog moderator prior to publishing. However, all legitimate comments will be published, whether they agree with or oppose the content of the post.