Panel Discussion: What dictates the quality of evidence to support practice?
What rationale, evidence, research, and texts are fair support for an idea or practice. What evidence falls short; leading to the eventual dismissal of an idea. Let’s discuss what makes a piece of research great, a text book top notch, a hypothesis worthy of consideration, and the pro's and con's of anecdotal evidence. Can't wait to get the panels input on this one.
Moderated by Brent Brookbush DPT, PT, MS, PES, CES, CSCS, ACSM H/FS
This Panel Discussion was originally posted on my facebook page - https://www.facebook.com/brent.brookbush - on August 1st, 2010
Jennifer DeMarre Jermaine, July 11, 2010 at 3:08pm: That it is current, not overly broad, and makes a coherent argument for its point of view. Also, math, spelling, and grammatical errors (etc) make it immediately untrustworthy.
Brent Brookbush, July 11, 2010 at 3:15pm Can I assume your speaking specifically to research, and not necessarily to a hypothesis, idea, or textbook? Further, does the term "current" mean that research done in the 90's is no longer relevant, or worse that any research that was not done in the last 5 years can no longer be used to support an idea or claim?
Jennifer DeMarre Jermaine, July 11, 2010 at 3:30pm: For example, my husband is taking an economics class and the book was last updated in 2005. Most of the theories presented about the present economic state are no longer relevant or flat out wrong (as proven by the global economy in the last 3 years). I'm not saying the entire text book us useless, but the teacher refuses to supplement it with current publications.
Jennifer DeMarre Jermaine, July 11, 2010 at 3:33pm: "Current" depends on the topic of discussion. Some areas have changed dramatically in the last 5 years, others have hardly moved in 20+ years.
Brent Brookbush July 11, 2010 at 3:43pm: Interesting comparison… The economy has changed rapidly in the past decade, I am not sure the body changes as fast, but….
Our understanding might. Current is definitely important, but I believe some try to use this as a trump card in our industry - dismissing anything that wasn't published yesterday. It can be a dangerous "Catch 22" where on one hand we speak of a body of research that lacks robustness, but on the other hand we dismiss all research that is not "current".
Jennifer DeMarre Jermaine, July 11, 2010 at 4:07pm: I think, even within the fitness industry, how you work with individuals with physical disabilities has changed dramatically in the last 5-10 years. New surgical techniques, new medical devices, and now the integration of bionics can change how bodies recover and rehabilitate. But, on the other hand, herbal remedies and enhancements haven't really changed in thousands of years. Also, our understanding of how muscles relate to our overall bodies has hardly changed in decades.
Marco Ferdinandi, July 11, 2010 at 10:00pm: Research is inherently flawed. This is because, in order to be valid and reliable it is necessary to control many variables that will occur in the natural world. Not only that, but the design of the study can greatly impact the outcome. This naturally leads to only looking at the parts of a whole. The best we can do is use research, etc to keep asking questions and further our basic understanding. We should use Peer review to validate most ideas until a better idea or proof comes along. Of course, there is always that one pioneer idea that doesn't gain acceptance immediately, but is eventually proven to be on the right path. That's why i love these panel discussions, they are so Zen!
Brent Brookbush, July 12, 2010 at 12:14pm: Thanks Marco - I am glad I have created an outlet of Zen… I think I am going to add that to the forum objectives currently in development. To your points about research, you are absolutely right. Research remains one of the most important components of evidence-based practice, but it is amazing how many people are really not aware of what research is. I like to think of a study like one dot on a pointillist peace of art. It takes many dots to make a whole picture, and takes a person capable of seeing the whole picture to tell us what it means. We should do another forum on "points to remember when reading research"