ABSTRACT This paper discusses, compares, and contrasts 4 different models for bringing evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) into practice and into practical reasoning. I look at what questions the models can and cannot answer, what role they accord to RCT evidence, and what their possible attraction for practitioners might be. The models are those of Philip Davies, Nancy Cartwright, Stephen Toulmin, and Harald Grimen. The first 2 are constructed for the purpose of using evidence in practice, the 3rd is an adapted argumentation model, and the 4th is based on phronesis and represents an alternative to evidence-based education. It is argued that of these, Toulmin’s model has the narrative qualities that make it the most usable and practitioner-friendly model.

中文翻译：

---

从业者的故事：实践中研究证据的可能作用

摘要本文讨论，比较和对比了将随机对照试验（RCT）的证据引入实践和实践推理的4种不同模型。我将研究模型可以回答和不能回答的问题，它们对RCT证据的作用，以及它们对从业者的吸引力。这些模型是Philip Davies，Nancy Cartwright，Stephen Toulmin和Harald Grimen的模型。前两个是为了在实践中使用证据的目的而构建的，第三个是经过改编的论证模型，第四个是基于语调的，它代表了循证教育的另一种选择。有人认为，Toulmin的模型具有叙述性，使其成为最有用和对实践者友好的模型。