Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Evidence-based practice or evidence-guided practice [electronic resource] : A rose by any other name would smell as sweet [invited response to Gitterman & Knight's “evidence-guided practice”] /

by Thyer, Bruce A.
Material type: materialTypeLabelArticleDescription: pp. 79-84.Online resources: Click here to access full-text article In: Families in society: the journal of contemporary social services 2013, Vol. 94, No. 2Summary: Gitterman and Knight (2013) expand upon the original model of evidence-based practice (EBP) by proposing an approach they label evidence-guided practice (EGP). They justify this by highlighting some supposed limitations of the original EBP model and by presenting some additional features to amend EBP into EGP. I attempt to show that the limitations they say characterize EBP are not actually a part of the real EBP model and are based upon either a misreading of the EBP literature, or by overlooking some of the features of EBP. I also try to demonstrate that most of the add-on elements to EBP they propose to label EGB are actually already present in the original model of EBP. One of their add-ons, an increased reliance upon formal theory as evidence, in addition to empirical research, seems to me a retrograde step and will perpetuate the harmful influence of some aspects of theory in social work practice. However, I judge their EGP model to be an improvement upon current social work practice, which largely tends to ignore empirical research findings to assist in decision making.
No physical items for this record

Gitterman and Knight (2013) expand upon the original model of evidence-based practice (EBP) by proposing an approach they label evidence-guided practice (EGP). They justify this by highlighting some supposed limitations of the original EBP model and by presenting some additional features to amend EBP into EGP. I attempt to show that the limitations they say characterize EBP are not actually a part of the real EBP model and are based upon either a misreading of the EBP literature, or by overlooking some of the features of EBP. I also try to demonstrate that most of the add-on elements to EBP they propose to label EGB are actually already present in the original model of EBP. One of their add-ons, an increased reliance upon formal theory as evidence, in addition to empirical research, seems to me a retrograde step and will perpetuate the harmful influence of some aspects of theory in social work practice. However, I judge their EGP model to be an improvement upon current social work practice, which largely tends to ignore empirical research findings to assist in decision making.

Mode of access: Internet.


Hong Kong Nang Yan College of Higher Education
Lee Yan Fong Library
325-329 Lai Chi Kok Road, Shamshuipo, Kowloon, HONG KONG