Limitations and criticism There are a number of limitations and criticisms of evidence-based medicine. Two widely cited categorization schemes for the various published critiques of EBM include the three-fold division of Straus and McAlister ("limitations universal to the practice of medicine, limitations unique to evidence-based medicine and misperceptions of evidence-based-medicine") and the five-point categorization of Cohen, Stavri and Hersh (EBM is a poor philosophic basis for medicine, defines evidence too narrowly, is not evidence-based, is limited in usefulness when applied to individual patients, or reduces the autonomy of the doctor/patient relationship).
LiMItaTioNs and crItIcism there Are a NUmbEr of liMitaTionS anD criticisMs Of evIdeNce-based MedIcINe. Two WidEly cited caTegoriZaTiOn ScHEmEs for The VAriOuS pUBlishED cRItiqUES Of ebm INCLuDe the three-fOld diVisiOn OF stRAUs and mcaListeR ("lIMITatioNs unIversAL to the pRactIcE oF medICIne, LImitations unIque To EvideNcE-bAsed mEdiCine And mISPercepTIOnS of EvIdence-basEd-medIciNe") and the FivE-POiNt cAtEgorizATion of cOHEn, stavri And heRSH (EBm is a pooR PhilosOphIC basIs FOr medicine, DefIneS EVidENCE toO nArrowly, is nOt evidenCe-bASeD, is LiMited In uSefUlNeSS when APPlIed to IndividuaL PAtiENTs, Or reDuces the AutOnOmY OF THe doCTor/patIeNt RElAtionshiP).