Evidence-Based Practice Empowers Practitioners: A Response to Epstein

Autor/in	Rubin, Allen
Titel	Evidence-Based Practice Empowers Practitioners: A Response to Epstein
Quelle	In: Research on Social Work Practice, 25 (2015) 4, S.507-509 (3 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1049-7315
DOI	10.1177/1049731514543666
Schlagwörter	Stellungnahme; Evidence; Empowerment; Research Utilization; Theory Practice Relationship; Reader Response; Social Work; Caseworker Approach; Caseworkers; Misconceptions; Research Skills; Social Science Research + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Evidenz; Forschungsumsetzung; Theorie-Praxis-Beziehung; Leserbrief; Soziale Arbeit; Missverständnis; Forschungsleistung; Social scientific research; Sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung
Abstract	Epstein makes a strong argument for the value of clinical data mining (CDM), although he minimizes some of the potential limitations in that methodology, such as attrition. Epstein's portrayal of evidence-based practice (EBP) as practitioner-bashing and treasuring intervention manuals overlooks the emphasis in the EBP process on the need for practitioners to use their clinical expertise and judgment in deciding whether and how to implement research supported interventions. His portrayal of EBP as cherishing randomized clinical trials to the point of demeaning all other forms of research also is a misrepresentation of the EBP process and a straw man argument. Although CDM is one way to try to bridge the research-practice gap, arguing that it is perhaps the only or best way to do so overstates the case. Instead of bashing practitioners, as Epstein implies, EBP empowers them. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01