3. National Library of Medicine. Disponible en: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (Ingresado en abril del
2002)
4. Weiner JM, Shirley S, Gilman NJ, Stowe SM, Wolf RM. Access to data and the information explosion: oral contraceptives and risk of cancer. Contraception 1981; 24: 301-13.
5. Schechter A. The crisis in clinical research: Endangering the half-century National Institutes of Health Consensus. JAMA 1998; 280: 1440-2.
6. Gill GN. The end of the physician scientist. Am Scholar 1984; 53: 353-68.
7. Wilmshurst P. Devaluing clinical skills. BMJ 2000; 320: 1739.
8. Ahrens EH. The Crisis in Clinical Research: Overcoming Institutional Obstacles. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1992.
9. Bunge MA, García JL, SempereJ. (trad.) Teoría y Realidad. Barcelona: Ariel 1981; 89-107.
10. Sackett D, Rosenberg WM, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996; 312: 71-2.
11. Knottnerus JA, Dinant GJ. Medicine based evidence, to prerequisite for evidence based medicine. BMJ 1997; 315: 1109-10.
12. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 1992; 268: 2420-5.
13. Huicho L. La medicina basada en evidencias como un nuevo paradigma de la enseñanza y la práctica de la medicina. An Fac Med 1997; 58(2): 118-27.
14. Kuhn T, Contin A (trad.). La Estructura de las Revoluciones Científicas. Bogotá: Fondo de Cultura Económica; 1998. Originalmente publicado en inglés: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 1962.
15. Bunge MA. Vigencia de la Filosofía: Ciencia y técnica. Investigación y universidad. Lima: Universidad Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, Fondo editorial; 1997.
16. Rosoff A. Evidence-based medicine and the law: the courts confront clinical practice guidelines. J Health Politics, Policy and Law 2001; 26: 327-68.
17. Tanenbaum SJ. What physicians know. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1268-71.
18. Naylor CD. Grey zones of clinical practice: some limits to evidence-based medicine. Lancet 1995; 345: 840-2.
19. Beresford EB. Uncertainty and the shaping of medical decisions. Hastings Cent Rep 1991; 21: 6-11.
20. Peña A, Paco O. El concepto general de enfermedad. Revisión, crítica y propuesta. Primera parte. Anales de la Facultad de Medicina 2002; 63: 223-32.
21. Peña A, Paco O. El concepto general de enfermedad. Revisión, crítica y propuesta. Segunda parte: carencias y defectos en los intentos por lograr una definición general de enfermedad. An Fac Med 2002; 63: 313-21.
22. De Vitto S. On the value-neutrality of the concepts of health and disease: unto the breach again. J Med Philos 2000; 25: 539-67.
23. Rudnick A. The ends of medical intervention and the demarcation of the normal from the pathological. J Med Philos 2000; 25: 569-80.
24. Scadding JG. Essentialism and nominalism in medicine: logic of diagnosis in disease terminology. Lancet 1996; 348: 594-600.
25. Sadegh-Zadeh K. Fuzzy health, illness, and disease. J Med Philos 2000; 25: 605-38.
26. Bunge MA. Epistemología. Curso de actualización. Barcelona: Ariel; 1980: 238-243.
27. Peña A, Paco O. El concepto general de enfermedad. Tercera parte: Un modelo teórico de enfermedad. An Fac Med 2003; 64(1): 55-62.
28. Christakis D, Rivara F. Pediatricians' awareness of and attitudes about four clinical practice guidelines. Pediatrics 1998; 101: 825-30.
29. McColl A, Smith H, White P. General practitioners' perceptions of the route to evidence based medicine: a questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998; 316: 361-5.
30. Olatunbosun O, Edouard L, Pierson R. Physicians' attitudes toward evidence based obstetric practice: a questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998; 316: 365-6.
31. Hofer BK, Pintrich PR. The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Rev Educat Res 1997; 67: 88-140.
32. Hammer D, Elby A. Epistemological Resources. En: Fishman B, O'Connor-Divelbiss S (Eds.) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences 2000: 4-5.
33. Peña A, Paco O, Peralta C. Epistemological beliefs and knowledge among physicians: A questionnaire survey. Medical Education Online 2002; 7: 4. Disponible desde URL
http://www.med-ed-online.org.
34. Eisenberg DM, Kessler RC, Foster C, Norlock FE, Calkins DR, Delbanco TL. Unconventional medicine in the United States - prevalence, costs, and patterns of use. N Engl J Med 1993; 328: 246-52.
35. Goldbeck-Wood S. Medicine and the media: Complementary medicine and the cure for credulity. BMJ 1996; 312: 1678.
36. Vickers AJ. Bibliometric analysis of randomised controlled trials in complementary medicine. Complementary Ther Med 1998; 6: 185-9.
37. Cochrane Collaboration and the Cochrane Library. Disponible en http://www.cochrane.org (Ingresado en Enero del 2003).
38. Linde K. Clausius N, Ramirez G, Melchart D, Eitel F, Hedges LV, et al. Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo controlled trials. Lancet 1997; 350: 834-43.
39. Popper KR, Sánchez de Zavala (trad.). La Lógica de la Investigación Científica. Madrid; Tecnos; 1962. Originalmente publicado, en inglés: The Logic of Scientific Discovery, London; Hutchinson; 1959.
40. Popper KR. El Desarrollo del Conocimiento Científico, Conjeturas y Refutaciones. Barcelona; Paidos 1965: 47.
