Evidence-based Medicine is the application of the best evidence available in the care of individual patients, using mathematical estimates of probability and risk. Although elements of EBM have appeared centuries ago, the term Evidence-based Medicine has been used for 10 years only. The spread of EBM followed studies which had shown that in contemporary medicine a significant proportion of interventions, although they are considered as the standard of care, have not proven efficacy. The two principles of EBM are that evidence alone is not enough for clinical decision making and that there is a hierarchy of evidence. Evidence-based medicine can be practiced in up to five steps i.e. formulating answerable clinical questions, searching for the best available evidence, critically appraising the evidence, applying the evidence in clinical situations and evaluating one’s effectiveness and efficiency. One does not have to go through all steps in practicing EBM, e.g. there now exist the so called secondary publications which are systematic reviews or meta-analyses of all available studies on a clinical problem or journals entirely devoted in appraisal of original studies. Notwithstanding the “success” of EBM there is a strong current of criticism on subjects practical and philosophical alike. The strongest point against EBM however is that there is no evidence that practicing EBM improves patients’ outcomes. In our opinion, EBM is a very useful instrument with wide-ranging applications in the practice of medicine. However EBM is neither a new scientific field nor a paradigm shift in contemporary medicine. As an empirical approach to clinical problems, EBM does not produce scientific knowledge and therefore it should not be given more room than it deserves, neglecting basic or clinical research. “...between man and angel there is this difference, that an angel perceives the truth by simple apprehension, whereas man becomes acquainted with a simple truth by a process from manifold data” Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica
