[Scientific evidence in medicine: the only alternative?].
The present article aims to reflect on the current situation of medical sciences by incorporating a critical discussion of knowledge atomization, which can be a consequence of the pragmatism of scientific evidence. The article proposes to integrate the contributions of quantitative and qualitative methodologies in health sciences, paying attention to qualitative and quantitative designs that take into account the complexity of human beings and their axiological, social, and cultural referents.The authors defend and argue for the need for health research to contemplate five useful dimensions for decision-making, approaching the object of the study and without eliminating the subject and his/her polyhedral and complex circumstances. Medicine must unavoidably consider technological and technical knowledge, but this training must not elude the necessary relational and communicative competences. Scientific and medical updating implies a constant close association between technical rigor and improved links among the individuals involved (health professionals and the public), with a careful and respectful attitude. Community activity and the gradual establishment of complicities are put forward as the basis for an integrative health model, with biopsychosocial roots, both at a theoretical and a practical level.
Sarrado
Juan José
JJ
Institut d'Estudis de la Salut, Barcelona, Spain.
Clèries
Xavier
X
Ferrer
Marta
M
Kronfly
Eduardo
E
D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D035843:Biomedical Research; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D003142:Communication; D003657:Decision Making; D003695:Delivery of Health Care; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations