Home > Journals > La Rivista Italiana della Medicina di Laboratorio > Past Issues > La Rivista Italiana della Medicina di Laboratorio 2020 Giugno;16(2) > La Rivista Italiana della Medicina di Laboratorio 2020 Giugno;16(2):83-5

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

L’OSSERVATORIO   

La Rivista Italiana della Medicina di Laboratorio 2020 Giugno;16(2):83-5

DOI: 10.23736/S1825-859X.20.00059-6

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: Italian

How to tell a good (medical) decision from a bad one?

Joseph WATINE

Laboratorio di Biologia Medica, Centro Ospedaliero di Villefranche-de-Rouergue, Villefranche-de-Rouergue, Francia



This article discusses the concepts of benefits-to-harms and benefits-to-risks ratios in medicine and the uncertainty for a “true” definition of them, on the basis of the concept of evidence (with its biases and limits) and of the judgments about the pieces of evidence (depending on knowledge, values, beliefs of both physicians and patients) offered by evidence-based medicine. Moreover, for a proposal of a general rule for defining good or bad a medical decision, a good understanding of both individual decisional autonomy and human community equity is needed.


KEY WORDS: Evidence-based medicine; Clinical decision-making; Health equity

top of page