English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

There was a tremendous renovation in the last 20 years of teaching and practicing clinical medicine after the appearance of evidence based medicine (EBM).1 It compelled to revolutionize the conventional theoretical reasoning by the evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analysis, high quality observational and clinical trials along with clinical proficiency and the wishes and needs of the patients. Three major components of EBM are Patient (values, concerns, preferences, expectations, life predicament), Physician (training, experience, current expertise, continued learning, demand for proof) and information (clinically relevant, proven by research, best up-to-date evidence). The standard basis of medical practice should be focussed on clinical experience, consultation with other professionals and training, case reports, non-experimental convincing evidence from articles, product literature, patient’s preferences, active search of meta-analysis, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCT) reports. Bastian et al. accounted in 2010 that there were 75 trials and 11 systematic reviews of trials and evidence showed there was an exponential growth in the current scenario of 2015.2 So the problem is how the physicians should be up to date and cope up with this.

Is the Science in Right Direction? Pitfalls of Evidence Based Medicine in Nepal