Evidence-based medicine and the law: the courts confront clinical practice guidelines.
This article examines how courts are likely to apply evidence-based medicine, and particularly clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), in healthcare litigation involving quality-of-care and entitlement-to-benefits (coverage) claims. Exploring the "politics" of the current situation, it observes that, just as clinicians have been reluctant to use CPGs in practice, courts have been, and likely will continue to be, slow to apply them in deciding cases., The article analyzes extant and proposed statutory approaches to legitimizing and promoting courts' use of CPGs. It concludes by renewing the author's earlier and controversial proposal to establish a voluntary federal program for certifying guidelines and directing courts to give certified CPGs greater weight in healthcare litigation.
Rosoff
A J
AJ
University of Pennsylvania, USA.
D002568:Certification; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D007603:Jurisprudence; D016365:Liability, Legal; D008318:Malpractice / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D011057:Politics; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D014481:United States