Evidence and Ethics in Occupational Therapy

Reagon, Bellin and Boniface argue that traditional models of evidence-based practice focus too much on randomised controlled trials and neglect 'the multiple truths of occupational therapy'. This opinion piece points out several flaws in their argument, and suggests that it is unethical to rely on weaker evidence sources when higher quality evidence exists. Ironically, the evidence that they provide to support their argument regarding different types of evidence is itself very weak.
Keywords Ethics  Evidence  Medicine
Categories (categorize this paper)
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index Translate to english
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 15,879
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Erica Zarkovich & R. E. G. Upshur (2002). The Virtues of Evidence. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 23 (4-5):403-412.
John Worrall (2010). Evidence: Philosophy of Science Meets Medicine. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16 (2):356-362.
R. E. G. Upshur & Errol Colak (2003). Argumentation and Evidence. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24 (4):283-299.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

10 ( #227,665 of 1,725,157 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #349,161 of 1,725,157 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.