How do proponents of evidence-based practice (EBP) and research differ in their definitions according to the chapter?

Proponents of research argue that evidence-based practice (EBP) is institution-specific, lacks a theoretical framework, and its data cannot be statistically tested. In contrast, proponents of EBP claim it is broader, includes research when appropriate, and can compile data from specific institutions into national databases for broader implications.

The chapter outlines differing views on evidence-based practice (EBP) and research. Proponents of research view EBP as being limited to specific institutions, lacking a theoretical framework, and not amenable to statistical testing and analysis. On the other hand, proponents of EBP argue that it is a broader concept that incorporates research where suitable, and that data collected from specific institutions can be aggregated into national data banks, providing information with wide-ranging implications. Despite these differences, ethical considerations remain crucial for both approaches, particularly in protecting human subjects.