Evidence-based practice is the discipline behind the Evidence-Based Decision-Making sub-competency. CEBMa supplies the definition, the four sources and the six steps.
The definition
CEBMa defines evidence-based practice as decision-making through the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of the best available evidence from multiple sources.
Those three adjectives are tested word for word. Not "rapid, intuitive and experienced" - that is the intuition-led practice the approach exists to discipline. Not "exhaustive, statistical and automated," which overstates the standard. Not "confidential, selective and strategic" - selective use of evidence contradicts the definition.
The four sources of evidence
- The scientific literature
- The organization's own data
- Practitioners' professional experience and judgment
- Stakeholders' values and concerns
Distractors offer benchmarking data, vendor research, consultants and executives - plausible information providers, but not CEBMa's four. Surveys, interviews, focus groups and observation are collection methods. Descriptive, diagnostic, predictive and prescriptive are analytics types.
The six steps
Asking, Acquiring, Appraising, Aggregating, Applying, Assessing.
- Asking: translating a practical issue or problem into an answerable question. This is first - not Acquiring, and not Applying, which is tempting because it is where the decision is made but is step five.
- Acquiring: systematically searching for and retrieving the evidence.
- Appraising: critically judging the trustworthiness and relevance of each piece.
- Aggregating: weighing and pulling together the evidence. This is the step when studies, internal data and stakeholder input are all in hand and being combined before deciding. Appraising precedes it.
- Applying: incorporating the evidence into the decision.
- Assessing: evaluating the outcome of the decision taken - reviewing a year later whether the referral bonus produced the intended outcome.
The scenario
Two departments using a new coaching program had the lowest turnover last quarter, and a manager wants it mandatory. Examine the evidence from multiple sources, including organizational data and the scientific literature, before recommending a course of action. Mandating treats a correlation as cause; rejecting it outright dismisses genuine organizational evidence instead of appraising it; waiting a year delays a decision available evidence could inform now.