When we took the editorship of Evidence-Based Mental Health (EBMH) at the end of 2013, we set two main objectives: to promote and embed an evidence-based medicine (EBM) approach into daily mental health clinical practice, and to get an impact factor (IF) for EBMH. Both aims have been big challenges and we have learnt a lot. EBM has been around for about 30 years now, shaping and changing the way we practice medicine. When Guyatt and colleagues published their seminal paper in 1992,1 EBM was described as the combination of three intersecting domains: the best available evidence, the clinical state and circumstances, and patient’s preferences and values. EBM and EBMH have since continuously evolved to deepen our understanding of these three domains. We keep complaining about the poor quality of studies in mental health. To properly assess the effects of interventions and devices before and after regulatory approval, we all know that randomised controlled trials are the best study design.2 3 However, real-world data are crucial to shed light on key clinical questions,4 especially when adverse events5 or prognostic factors6 are investigated. It necessarily …

中文翻译：

---

如果

2013 年底，当我们担任《循证心理健康》(EBMH) 杂志的编辑时，我们设定了两个主要目标：推广循证医学 (EBM) 方法并将其嵌入到日常心理健康临床实践中，并获得EBMH 的影响因子 (IF)。这两个目标都是巨大的挑战，我们学到了很多东西。EBM 已存在约 30 年，塑造并改变了我们的医疗方式。当 Guyatt 及其同事于 1992 年发表其开创性论文时，1 EBM 被描述为三个交叉领域的组合：最佳可用证据、临床状态和环境以及患者的偏好和价值观。此后，EBM 和 EBMH 不断发展，加深了我们对这三个领域的理解。我们一直抱怨心理健康研究质量低下。为了正确评估监管机构批准前后干预措施和设备的效果，我们都知道随机对照试验是最好的研究设计。2 3 然而，真实世界的数据对于阐明关键临床问题至关重要，4 尤其是在出现不良反应时对事件 5 或预后因素 6 进行调查。必然是……