Location
University of Windsor
Document Type
Paper
Keywords
Argument structure, Cartwright, EBP, evidence, holism, model, model merging, practical reasoning, RCT, Toulmin
Start Date
18-5-2016 9:00 AM
End Date
21-5-2016 5:00 PM
Abstract
The context for this paper is evidence-based practice (EBP). EBP is about production of desirable change. The evidence should come from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To make sense of RCT evidence it must be placed in an argument structure. I compare two different models, Toulmin and Cartwright, and investigate whether the two models can be merged into one. I shall argue that such merging is not feasible.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Reader's Reactions
David Hitchcock, Commentary on Tone Kvernbekk’s “Comparing two models of evidence” (May 2016)
Included in
Comparing Two Models of Evidence
University of Windsor
The context for this paper is evidence-based practice (EBP). EBP is about production of desirable change. The evidence should come from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To make sense of RCT evidence it must be placed in an argument structure. I compare two different models, Toulmin and Cartwright, and investigate whether the two models can be merged into one. I shall argue that such merging is not feasible.
