Probability at the Bedside: The Knowing of Chances or the Chances of Knowing?
Authors: Steven N. Goodman
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (1999)

Editorials6 April 1999Probability at the Bedside: The Knowing of Chances or the Chances of Knowing?Steven N. Goodman, MD, PhDSteven N. Goodman, MD, PhDJohns Hopkins University; Baltimore, MD 21205 (Goodman)Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-130-7-199904060-00022 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail In this issue, Steiner (1) discusses the impact on the patient of presenting risk reduction estimates in two ways: as a statement of the patient's relative risk reduction and as the number needed to treat. Steiner calls the relative risk reduction the "language of individuals" and the number needed to treat the "language of populations." This distinction is part of an ongoing discussion in the literature of problems with bringing evidence-based medicine to the bedside (2-6). What is less appreciated is that it is also part of a centuries-old, unresolved philosophical debate about the meaning of an individual patient's risk. ...References1. Steiner JF. Talking about treatment: the language of populations and the language of individuals. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130:618-22. LinkGoogle Scholar2. Green L. Using evidence-based medicine in clinical practice. Prim Care. 1998;25:391-400. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Jacobson LD, Edwards AG, Granier SK, Butler CC. Evidence-based medicine and general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1997;47:449-52. MedlineGoogle Scholar4. Naylor CD. Grey zones of clinical practice: some limits to evidence-based medicine. Lancet. 1995;345:840-2. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Haynes RB, Sackett DL, Guyatt GH, Cook DJ, Gray JA. Transferring evidence from research into practice: 4. Overcoming barriers to application [Editorial]. ACP J Club. 1997;126:A14-5. AbstractGoogle Scholar6. Glasziou P, Guyatt GH, Dans AL, Dans LF, Straus S, Sackett DL. Applying the results of trials and systematic reviews to individual patients [Editorial]. ACP J Club. 1998;129:A15-6. AbstractGoogle Scholar7. Bernstein P. Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk. New York: J Wiley; 1996. Google Scholar8. Hacking I. The Emergence of Probability. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ Pr; 1975. Google Scholar9. Hacking I. The Taming of Chance. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ Pr; 1990. Google Scholar10. Matthews J. Quantification and the Quest for Medical Certainty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ Pr; 1995. Google Scholar11. Poisson SD, Dulong PL, Larrey DJ, Double FJ. Report. Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des séances de L'Académie des Sciences. 1835;1:167-77. Google Scholar12. Buyse M. A biostatistical tribute to Ignaz Philip Semmelweis. Stat Med. 1997;16:2767-72. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13. Bernard C. An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine. New York: Dover; 1957. Google Scholar14. Tonelli MR. The philosophical limits of evidence-based medicine. Acad Med. 1998;73:1234-40. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar15. Summers RL. Evidence-based medicine vs scientific reasoning [Letter]. Acad Emerg Med. 1996;3:183-4. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar16. Polychronis A, Miles A, Bentley P. The protagonists of 'evidence-based medicine': arrogant, seductive and controversial. J Eval Clin Pract. 1996;2:9-12. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar17. Horwitz RI. The dark side of evidence-based medicine. Cleve Clin J Med. 1996;63:320-3. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar18. Davidoff F. The future of scientific medicine [Editorial]. CMAJ. 1998;159:243-4. MedlineGoogle Scholar19. Miettinen OS. Evidence in medicine: invited commentary [Editorial]. CMAJ. 1998;158:215-21. MedlineGoogle Scholar20. Tanenbaum SJ. What physicians know. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1268-71. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Johns Hopkins University; Baltimore, MD 21205 (Goodman)Corresponding Author: Steven N. Goodman, MD, PhD, Johns Hopkins University, 550 North Broadway, Suite 409, Baltimore, MD 21205. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoTalking about Treatment: The Language of Populations and the Language of Individuals John F. Steiner Talking about Treatment John C. Peirce Toward Evidence-Based Statistics Steven Goodman Metrics Cited ByWhen will individuals meet their personalized probabilities? A philosophical note on risk predictionEpidemiological Evidence: Use at Your 'Own Risk'?The Predictive Approaches to Treatment effect Heterogeneity (PATH) StatementDavid M. Kent, MD, MS, Jessica K. Paulus, ScD, David van Klaveren, PhD, Ralph D'Agostino, PhD, Steve Goodman, MD, MHS, PhD, Rodney Hayward, MD, John P.A. Ioannidis, MD, DSc, Bray Patrick-Lake, MFS, Sally Morton, PhD, Michael Pencina, PhD, Gowri Raman, MBBS, MS, Joseph S. Ross, MD, MHS, Harry P. Selker, MD, MSPH, Ravi Varadhan, PhD, Andrew Vickers, PhD, John B. Wong, MD, and Ewout W. Steyerberg, PhDMachine Learning Based Outlook for the Analysis of SNP-SNP Interaction for Biomedical Big DataCommunicating Uncertainty: a Narrative Review and Framework for Future ResearchThe role of hope for health professionals in rehabilitation: A qualitative study on unfavorable prognosis communicationPersonalized evidence based medicine: predictive approaches to heterogeneous treatment effectsSystematic reviews and meta-analysis: why might more clinical trials yield no greater precision?The Risk GP Model: The standard model of prediction in medicineImproving the evidence base for better comparative effectiveness researchBig Data Analysis Using Modern Statistical and Machine Learning Methods in MedicineBayesian Methods for Evidence EvaluationMaking Predictions(De)Personalized MedicineThe 2012 AANS Presidential AddressImproving the quality of medical care: the normativity of evidence-based performance standardsVarieties of Uncertainty in Health CareDecision Analysis and Decision Support Systems in Anatomic PathologyUncertainty in Clinical MedicineViews on primary prevention of cardiovascular disease - an interview study with Swedish GPsIndividualised risk estimation and the nature of preventionPrima facieConceptual problems in laypersons' understanding of individualized cancer risk: a qualitative studyOn the association between statin and fracture: A Bayesian considerationDisclosure of Individual Surgeon's Performance Rates During Informed ConsentAnti-Hip Fracture Efficacy of Bisphosphonates: A Bayesian Analysis of Clinical TrialsPatients' ideas, fears and expectations of their coronary risk: barriers for primary preventionA code of best practice for disease control programmes to avoid damaging health care services in developing countriesDiversity, the Individual, and Proof of Efficacy: Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Medical EducationSeniors' Preferences for Cancer Screening and Medication Use Based on Absolute Risk ReductionStatins and cancer: a case of meta-uncertaintyA chance philosophical survey of the historical basis of statistical inferenceIncertidumbre y la toma de decisiones clínicasKennis of kans, epidemiologiekans? epidemiologieEpidemiologie in de individuele patiëntenzorgpatiëntenzorgEvidentiary challenges to evidence-based medicineToward Evidence-Based StatisticsSteven Goodman, MD, PhDTalking about TreatmentJohn C. Peirce, MD, MA, MSEvidence-based medicine and hypertension 6 April 1999Volume 130, Issue 7Page: 604-606KeywordsAbsolute risk reductionAutopsyEvidence based medicineForecastingMortalityPopulation statisticsReasoningRelative riskStatistical methodsSurgeons Issue Published: 6 April 1999 CopyrightCopyright © 1999 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF DownloadLoading ...