EBM uses modern clinical evidence available, alongside clinical expertise gained by experience within the field in order to provide the clinician with an effective method of obtaining a precise diagnosis, and therefore being able to establish a course of action (i.e. treatment, surgery etc.) that has yielded positive results in similar cases previously. Additionally, patient values and morals are adhered to throughout the process via the clinicians expertise throughout the process of gaining an understanding of the situation and responding effectively. A combination of these two ideas allows for an effective treatment being delivered to the patient, while also catering for the needs, values and morals of the patient as an individual . Additionally, using presented research means the clinician can make a judgement on whether the treatment proposed by the research is safe for their own scenario. This is because the research EBM provides is peer-evaluated and unbiased – having been subject to meta-analyses. Effectively, the clinician is implementing the known, most effective treatment observed in the treatment of cases similar to their own. Without EBM, the clinician may have to resort to trial and error to yield positive effects in their patient, which may result in the patient being subject to unnecessary harm.Furthermore, the criticism implies that EBM diverges from the use of a patient-centred approach when in dealing with clinical cases, and that patients are seen as more of a statistic as opposed to an individual. However, EBM is used alongside the clinician’s expertise and patient values and wishes. EBM uses clinical evidence to enhance patient safety and efficacy of treatment in order to provide the optimal result for the patient. Therefore, in most cases, the treatment of patients still caters for their individual circumstances and wishes.