Deciphering data: How should clinical trials change your clinical practice?

Introduction: The careful consideration of how to apply findings from the scientific literature is important to every physician's clinical practice. This can pose a difficult task, particularly with the increasing speed of technological advances and complexity involved in modern clinical trials. This review introduces a new method, the WHOM criteria (Who, How, Outcomes, Minimizing bias), from which orthopedic surgeons and other physicians can efficiently evaluate novel medical literature for inclusion into their clinical practice.
Whom Criteria: The WHOM framework consists of four steps. The first step, Who, involves confirming whether a sample population studied is similar to one's patient under treatment, in order to ensure the results can be reasonably applied. Second, the How, comprises evaluating the intervention performed and ensuring that it could be reasonably replicated. The third step requires thoroughly evaluating the outcomes used in the study so as to ensure they are clinically meaningful to both the treating physician and the patient. Finally, there must be a careful evaluation of potential sources of bias and the ways in which errors and bias were minimized in all phases of the study.
Conclusion: Evidence-based practice should drive clinical decision making whenever the necessary literature is available. This requires the careful evaluation of new literature on a regular basis so that physicians can render safe and effective health care in partnership with their patients. The WHOM criteria are described in order to aid clinicians in navigating published research and change practice when appropriate.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest This work was not supported by any funding. The authors do not have any relevant disclosures to the scope of this work.
(Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)