Abstract
This chapter briefly presents the management of the state of the art (sota) in Medicine as a possible learning opportunity for the future of Engineering. Engineering and Medicine are sibling disciplines for intervention in reality, “sciences of the artificial” according to Herbert A. Simon. They seek to enlarge and disseminate their state of the art (sota) for greater scope and effectiveness. Both seek to convert scientific knowledge or technological possibilities into answers and procedures in tune with practical needs. In different ways, each seeks to improve the quality of the data it considers and the rigor of the methods it employs. Medicine has arrived at one striking, unique arrangement to support individual practitioners: a system that collects, classifies and qualifies medical knowledge comprehensively, and culminates with access through Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO). PICO protocol allows a medical practitioner to access an up to date configuration of the whole of medical knowledge, being available as readily as in a smartphone. The chapter argues for the opportunity, propriety and desirability of translating the PICO experience to Engineering.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bigby, M. (2001). Challenges to the hierarchy of evidence. Does the emperor have no clothes? Archives of Dermatology, 137(3), 345–346.
Bluhm, R. (2005). From hierarchy to network – A richer view of evidence for evidence-based medicine. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 48(4), 535–547. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2005.0082.
Budgen, D., Kitchenham, B. A., Charters, S. M., Turner, M., Brereton, P., & Linkman, S. G. (2008). Presenting software engineering results using structured abstracts: A randomised experiment. Empirical Software Engineering, 13(4), 435–468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-008-9075-7.
Bunge, M. (2013). Medical philosophy: Conceptual issues in medicine. London: World Scientific Publishing.
Borgerson, K. (2009). Valuing evidence: Bias and the evidence hierarchy of evidence-based medicine. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 52(2), 218–233. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.0.0086
Caelleigh, A. S. (2000). PubMed central and the new publishing landscape: Shifts and tradeoffs. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 75, 4–10.
Claridge, J. A., & Fabian, T. C. (2005). History and development of evidence-based medicine. World Journal of Surgery, 29(5), 547–553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7910-1.
Colditz, G. A. (2012). Dissemination and implementation research. In R. C. Brownson, G. A. Colditz, & E. K. Proctor (Eds.), Dissemination and implementation research in health: Translating science to practice (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Da Silva, F. Q. B., Santos, A. L. M., Soares, S., Franca, A. C. C., Monteiro, C. V. F., & Maciel, F. F. (2011). Six years of systematic literature reviews in software engineering: An updated tertiary study. Information and Software Technology, 53(9, SI), 899–913.
Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2010). Objectivity. Zone Books.
Eccles, M., Clapp, Z., Grimshaw, J., Adams, P. C., Higgins, B., Purves, I., & Russel, I. (1996). North of England evidence based guidelines development project: Methods of guideline development. British Medical Journal, 312, 760–762.
Evans, D. (2003). Hierarchy of evidence: A framework for ranking evidence evaluating healthcare interventions. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 12, 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00662.
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).
Freidson, E. (1988). Profession of medicine: A study of the sociology of applied knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gigerenzer, G. & Selten, R. (Eds.). (2002). Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox (Reprint edition). Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.
Gordon, D. (1999). PubMed central: A boon to information access, a bane to quality control, or neither? Gastroenterology, 117, 1040.
Heneghan, C., & Badenoch, D. (2006). Evidence-based medicine toolkit. Malden/Oxford: BMJ Books/Blackwell Pub.
Higgins, J. P., & Green, S. (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (ver. 5.1.0). http://handbook.cochrane.org
Howick, J. (2011). The philosophy of evidence-based medicine. Chichester/West Sussex/Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell, BMJ Books.
Kitchenham, B. A. (2004). Procedures for undertaking systematic reviews. Joint Technical Report, Computer Science Department, 2004, Keele University (TR/SE-0401) and National ICT Australia Ltd (0400011T1).
Kitchenham, B. A., & Brereton, P. (2013). A systematic review of systematic review process research in software engineering. Information and Software Technology, 55(12), 2049–2075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2013.07.010.
Kitchenham, B. A., & Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Technical Report EBSE-2007-01, School of Computer Science and Mathematics, Keele University.
Kitchenham, B. A., Pfleeger, S. L., Pickard, L. M., Jones, P. W., Hoaglin, D. C., & El Emam, K. (2002). Preliminary guidelines for empirical research in software engineering. IEEE Transactions in Software Engineering, 28(8), 721–734.
Kitchenham, B. A., Brereton, O. P., Owen, S., Butcher, J., & Jefferies, C. (2008). Length and readability of structured software engineering abstracts. IET Software, 2(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-sen:20070044.
Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O. P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., & Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 51(1), 7–15.
Kitchenham, B., Pretorius, R., Budgen, D., Brereton, P., Turner, M., & Niazi, M. (2010). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A tertiary study. Information and Software Technology, 52(8), 792–805.
Kitchenham, B. A., Budgen, D., & Brereton, O. P. (2011). Using map** studies as the basis for further research – A participant-observer case study. Information and Software Technology, 53(6, SI), 638–651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2010.12.011.
Koen, B. V. (2003). Discussion of the method: Conducting the engineer’s approach to problem solving. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kurata, K., Morioka, T., Yokoi, K., & Matsubayashi, M. (2013). Remarkable growth of open access in the biomedical field: Analysis of PubMed articles from 2006 to 2010. PLoS One, 8, e60925.
Lindsey, W. T., & Olin, B. R. (2013). PubMed searches: Overview and strategies for clinicians. Nutrition in Clinical Practice: Official Publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 28, 165–176.
Lipscomb, C. E. (2000). Medical subject headings (MeSH). Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 88, 265–266.
Mantzoukas, S. (2008). A review of evidence-based practice, nursing research and reflection: Levelling the hierarchy. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17(2), 214–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01912.x.
Marshall, C., Brereton, P., & Kitchenham, B. A. (2014). Tools to support systematic reviews in software engineering: A feature analysis. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering (p. 13). ACM.
Marshall, C., Brereton, P., & Kitchenham, B. A. (2015). Tools to support systematic reviews in software engineering: A cross-domain survey using semi-structured interviews. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering (p. 26). ACM.
Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy (1st ed.). Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
Mittra, J., & Milne, C.-P. (2013). Introduction and definitions. In J. Mittra & C.-P. Milne (Eds.), Translational medicine: The future of therapy? Hoboken: Pan Stanford.
National Academies. (2016). Guidelines for the review of reports of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. http://www.nationalacademies.org/nasem/na_067075.html
National Health and Medical Research Council (1999). A guide to the development, implementation and evaluation of clinical practice guidelines [Endorsed 16 November 1998]. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
O’Leary, M. (1997). PubMed initiates new MEDLINE era. Database, 20, 70–72.
Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine (2001). Levels of evidence. http://www.cebm.net/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009/. Accessed 14 Jan 2016.
Petroski, H. (2011). The essential engineer: Why science alone will not solve our global problems (Reprint ed.). New York: Vintage.
Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method (2nd ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Richter, R. R., & Austin, T. M. (2012). Using MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) to enhance PubMed search strategies for evidence-based practice in physical therapy. Physical Therapy, 92, 124–132.
Silva, E. R., & Proença, D., Jr. (2015). Não ser não é não ter: Engenharia não é Ciência (nem mesmo ciência aplicada). In A. Proença et al. (Eds.), Gestão da Inovação e Competitividade no Brasil (pp. 197–218). Bookman: Porto Alegre.
Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63, 129–138.
Simon, H. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Straus, S. E., Glasziou, P., Richardson, W. S., & Haynes, R. B. (2011). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach it. Edinburgh: Elsevier/Churchill Livingstone.
Sur, R. L., & Dahm, P. (2011). History of evidence-based medicine. Indian Journal of Urology: IJU: Journal of the Urological Society of India, 27(4), 487–489. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.91438.
Thornicroft, G., Lempp, H., & Tansella, M. (2011). The place of implementation science in the translational medicine continuum. Psychological Medicine, 41(10), 2015–2021. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291711000109.
Van Aken, J. E., & Romme, G. (2012). A design science approach to evidence-based management. In D. M. Rousseau (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of evidence-based management (pp. 43–57). New York: Oxford University Press.
Vincenti, W. G. (1993). What engineers know and how they know it: Analytical studies from aeronautical history (Revised ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ Pr.
Wehling, M. (2015). Introduction to translational medicine. In M. Wehling (Ed.), Principles of translational science in medicine, second edition: From bench to bedside. Amsterdam: Academic Press.
Wilson, J. W. (1997). PubMed: A winner on the web for the National Library of Medicine. Online, 21, 60–61.
Wyer, P. C., & Silva, S. A. (2009). Where is the wisdom? I – A conceptual history of evidence-based medicine. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 15(6), 891–898. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01323.x.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Silva, É.R., Bartholo, R., Proença, D. (2018). Managing the State of the Art of Engineering: Learning from Medicine. In: Fritzsche, A., Oks, S. (eds) The Future of Engineering. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 31. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91029-1_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91029-1_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91028-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91029-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)