Toward a Transdisciplinary Model of Evidence-Based Practice

Jason M. Satterfield, Bonnie Spring, Ross C. Brownson, Edward J. Mullen, Robin Newhouse, Barbara B. Walker, Evelyn P. Whitlock

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

176 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Context: This article describes the historical context and current developments in evidence-based practice (EBP) for medicine, nursing, psychology, social work, and public health, as well as the evolution of the seminal "three circles" model of evidence-based medicine, highlighting changes in EBP content, processes, and philosophies across disciplines. Methods: The core issues and challenges in EBP are identified by comparing and contrasting EBP models across various health disciplines. Then a unified, transdisciplinary EBP model is presented, drawing on the strengths and compensating for the weaknesses of each discipline. Findings: Common challenges across disciplines include (1) how "evidence" should be defined and comparatively weighted; (2) how and when the patient's and/or other contextual factors should enter the clinical decision-making process; (3) the definition and role of the "expert"; and (4) what other variables should be considered when selecting an evidence-based practice, such as age, social class, community resources, and local expertise. Conclusions: A unified, transdisciplinary EBP model would address historical shortcomings by redefining the contents of each model circle, clarifying the practitioner's expertise and competencies, emphasizing shared decision making, and adding both environmental and organizational contexts. Implications for academia, practice, and policy also are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)368-390
Number of pages23
JournalMilbank Quarterly
Volume87
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Evidence-Based Practice
Evidence-Based Medicine
Social Work
Social Class
Decision Making
Nursing
Public Health
Psychology
Health

Keywords

  • Clinical decision making
  • Evidence-based practice
  • Transdisciplinary practice

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health Policy

Cite this

Satterfield, J. M., Spring, B., Brownson, R. C., Mullen, E. J., Newhouse, R., Walker, B. B., & Whitlock, E. P. (2009). Toward a Transdisciplinary Model of Evidence-Based Practice. Milbank Quarterly, 87(2), 368-390. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00561.x

Toward a Transdisciplinary Model of Evidence-Based Practice. / Satterfield, Jason M.; Spring, Bonnie; Brownson, Ross C.; Mullen, Edward J.; Newhouse, Robin; Walker, Barbara B.; Whitlock, Evelyn P.

In: Milbank Quarterly, Vol. 87, No. 2, 06.2009, p. 368-390.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Satterfield, JM, Spring, B, Brownson, RC, Mullen, EJ, Newhouse, R, Walker, BB & Whitlock, EP 2009, 'Toward a Transdisciplinary Model of Evidence-Based Practice', Milbank Quarterly, vol. 87, no. 2, pp. 368-390. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00561.x
Satterfield JM, Spring B, Brownson RC, Mullen EJ, Newhouse R, Walker BB et al. Toward a Transdisciplinary Model of Evidence-Based Practice. Milbank Quarterly. 2009 Jun;87(2):368-390. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00561.x
Satterfield, Jason M. ; Spring, Bonnie ; Brownson, Ross C. ; Mullen, Edward J. ; Newhouse, Robin ; Walker, Barbara B. ; Whitlock, Evelyn P. / Toward a Transdisciplinary Model of Evidence-Based Practice. In: Milbank Quarterly. 2009 ; Vol. 87, No. 2. pp. 368-390.
@article{a8c21e26e83d4fc3ae8515acf4f992a6,
title = "Toward a Transdisciplinary Model of Evidence-Based Practice",
abstract = "Context: This article describes the historical context and current developments in evidence-based practice (EBP) for medicine, nursing, psychology, social work, and public health, as well as the evolution of the seminal {"}three circles{"} model of evidence-based medicine, highlighting changes in EBP content, processes, and philosophies across disciplines. Methods: The core issues and challenges in EBP are identified by comparing and contrasting EBP models across various health disciplines. Then a unified, transdisciplinary EBP model is presented, drawing on the strengths and compensating for the weaknesses of each discipline. Findings: Common challenges across disciplines include (1) how {"}evidence{"} should be defined and comparatively weighted; (2) how and when the patient's and/or other contextual factors should enter the clinical decision-making process; (3) the definition and role of the {"}expert{"}; and (4) what other variables should be considered when selecting an evidence-based practice, such as age, social class, community resources, and local expertise. Conclusions: A unified, transdisciplinary EBP model would address historical shortcomings by redefining the contents of each model circle, clarifying the practitioner's expertise and competencies, emphasizing shared decision making, and adding both environmental and organizational contexts. Implications for academia, practice, and policy also are discussed.",
keywords = "Clinical decision making, Evidence-based practice, Transdisciplinary practice",
author = "Satterfield, {Jason M.} and Bonnie Spring and Brownson, {Ross C.} and Mullen, {Edward J.} and Robin Newhouse and Walker, {Barbara B.} and Whitlock, {Evelyn P.}",
year = "2009",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00561.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "87",
pages = "368--390",
journal = "Milbank Quarterly",
issn = "0887-378X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Toward a Transdisciplinary Model of Evidence-Based Practice

AU - Satterfield, Jason M.

AU - Spring, Bonnie

AU - Brownson, Ross C.

AU - Mullen, Edward J.

AU - Newhouse, Robin

AU - Walker, Barbara B.

AU - Whitlock, Evelyn P.

PY - 2009/6

Y1 - 2009/6

N2 - Context: This article describes the historical context and current developments in evidence-based practice (EBP) for medicine, nursing, psychology, social work, and public health, as well as the evolution of the seminal "three circles" model of evidence-based medicine, highlighting changes in EBP content, processes, and philosophies across disciplines. Methods: The core issues and challenges in EBP are identified by comparing and contrasting EBP models across various health disciplines. Then a unified, transdisciplinary EBP model is presented, drawing on the strengths and compensating for the weaknesses of each discipline. Findings: Common challenges across disciplines include (1) how "evidence" should be defined and comparatively weighted; (2) how and when the patient's and/or other contextual factors should enter the clinical decision-making process; (3) the definition and role of the "expert"; and (4) what other variables should be considered when selecting an evidence-based practice, such as age, social class, community resources, and local expertise. Conclusions: A unified, transdisciplinary EBP model would address historical shortcomings by redefining the contents of each model circle, clarifying the practitioner's expertise and competencies, emphasizing shared decision making, and adding both environmental and organizational contexts. Implications for academia, practice, and policy also are discussed.

AB - Context: This article describes the historical context and current developments in evidence-based practice (EBP) for medicine, nursing, psychology, social work, and public health, as well as the evolution of the seminal "three circles" model of evidence-based medicine, highlighting changes in EBP content, processes, and philosophies across disciplines. Methods: The core issues and challenges in EBP are identified by comparing and contrasting EBP models across various health disciplines. Then a unified, transdisciplinary EBP model is presented, drawing on the strengths and compensating for the weaknesses of each discipline. Findings: Common challenges across disciplines include (1) how "evidence" should be defined and comparatively weighted; (2) how and when the patient's and/or other contextual factors should enter the clinical decision-making process; (3) the definition and role of the "expert"; and (4) what other variables should be considered when selecting an evidence-based practice, such as age, social class, community resources, and local expertise. Conclusions: A unified, transdisciplinary EBP model would address historical shortcomings by redefining the contents of each model circle, clarifying the practitioner's expertise and competencies, emphasizing shared decision making, and adding both environmental and organizational contexts. Implications for academia, practice, and policy also are discussed.

KW - Clinical decision making

KW - Evidence-based practice

KW - Transdisciplinary practice

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=66849087495&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=66849087495&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00561.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00561.x

M3 - Review article

C2 - 19523122

AN - SCOPUS:66849087495

VL - 87

SP - 368

EP - 390

JO - Milbank Quarterly

JF - Milbank Quarterly

SN - 0887-378X

IS - 2

ER -