Responses

Download PDFPDF

Evidence-based medicine and COVID-19: what to believe and when to change
Free
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Public and Political Influence on Frontline Practice

    Dear Editor,

    I read with interest the recent article by Carley et al., “Evidence-based medicine and COVID-19: what to believe and when to change”1. The authors pay homage to the challenges of keeping pace with a pandemic growing at unprecedented speeds, forcing the hand of clinicians to make therapeutic decisions on the basis of weak, often unvalidated evidence. They also note the influence of political opinion, referencing Donald Trump’s infamous declaration on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-192. In their concluding statements, the authors eloquently present the need to follow science rather than emotions or politics.

    Having worked in a large critical care unit over the pandemic, I question how easy this is in practice. Clinicians, nurses and Allied Health Professionals do not exist in a vacuum, but rather their opinions and knowledge are inevitably shaped by social and cultural rhetoric. I use the example of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), an acronym once reserved to select professions yet now colloquially used by the lay person. Information regarding the appropriate PPE to be worn was disseminated in multiple formats, from news broadcasts to social media platforms such as Twitter. As knowledge developed about how the SARS-COV-2 virus was transmitted, recommendations on PPE changed accordingly. As of July 23rd, it was recommended that double gloving was not necessary3, and in fact increased the risk of transmitting e-coli...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.