This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

John A. Paraskos, MD

JAMA. 1992;268(16):2296-2297.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

At the very birth of medicine as a rational endeavor, the centrality of the scientific method was firmly established. In the Hippocratic writings, we are told of the conditions necessary for the proper conduct of medicine: "There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance."¹ The art (the techn) of medicine is characterized in the same passage as the use made of that knowledge in the light of accumulated clinical experience, so that "rashness indicates want of art." In harmony with these concepts and underscoring their importance, the 1992 National Conference on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiac Care (ECC) grades its recommendations according to the merit of the scientific evidence that led to them. Rules of evidence were delineated by the ECC Committee of the American Heart Association (AHA) that were used to evaluate the merit of the scientific data.^2(p2174) . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester.

Footnotes
Reprint requests to Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Ave N, Worcester, MA 01655 (Dr Paraskos).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?