In Brief  |   March 2013
The Evidence-Based Paradox
Author Affiliations
  • Jim Hinojosa, PhD, OT, BCP, FAOTA, is Professor, Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, New York University, 35 West Fourth Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10012; Jh9@nyu.edu
Article Information
Evidence-Based Practice / Departments
In Brief   |   March 2013
The Evidence-Based Paradox
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, March/April 2013, Vol. 67, e18-e23. doi:10.5014/ajot.2013.005587
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, March/April 2013, Vol. 67, e18-e23. doi:10.5014/ajot.2013.005587
Abstract

Many occupational therapy practitioners consider evidence-based practice (EBP) to be the means by which occupational therapy can prove the validity of its services and thus support the legitimacy of our profession. The unquestioned acceptance of EBP as the way to establish credibility concerns me; unchallenged acceptance of any idea concerns me. Do practitioners accept EBP as the paradigm for guiding occupational therapy practice and research solely because it is presented as what we must do? I believe that practitioners must examine the implications for our profession of accepting EBP without question. In this article, I review EBP, present criticisms and concerns voiced by other professions and, finally, examine the implications of adopting an EBP perspective that replaces theory-directed practice.