Fri bevisprövning och evidensbaserad medicin

En jämförelse av två modeller för evidens och beslut

Abstract

This paper compares two seemingly very different models for evidence management and decision making: the model of evidence based medicine, EBM, and the model of free evaluation of evidence (as applied in the Swedish judiciary system). Whereas EBM identifies and ranks the relevant kinds of evidence that a decisionmaker should consider, the model of free evaluation of evidence relies on the idea that truth is best pursued freely, and that the decision maker’s evaluation of evidence should not be governed by rules. The paper compares the levels of freedom in the two models with respect to what evidence to consider, how to assess the value of different pieces of evidence, and how to estimate the combined value of all the evidence. It concludes that the two models diverge in other ways than first assumed, and that the juxtaposition of them can be beneficial to both models, by casting light on underlying but seemingly unwarranted assumptions relating to the role of intuition and life experience in the evaluation of evidence.