摘要：
We advocate a systematic approach to evaluating scientific evidence
in a particular context, that of law, adjudication and public policy
which we call "evidence-based medical dispute resolution". The approach
adapts methods of evidence- based medicine and "critical appraisal"
that are now well accepted in health care to assist a court or an
adjudicating body, as in workers' compensation, to weigh evidence
in disputes involving health risks. Health and medical knowledge
are essential to the resolution of disputes in law and administrative
applications (such as workers' compensation) and provide essential
input into public policy decisions. There are no socially agreed-upon
rules for the application of this knowledge except the law. Even
within the legal system, courts vary and adjudication systems based
on tort law do not always work well, even when the interpretation
of scientific evidence is agreed upon by all sides. However, a big
part of the variability and inconsistency could be removed if there
were agreement on the interpretation of scientific evidence. This
cannot be done by rigid rules, of course, because the law does not
work this way. It has to be done by social convention.
