No Evidence‐Based Restoration Without a Sound Evidence Base: A Reply to Guldemond et al.

Evidence‐based practice is not possible without an evidence base. Guldemond et al. confuse our attempt at assessing the status of the evidence base of restoration programs in South Africa with attempting to assess whether restoration is evidence‐based. While we fully agree with them that there is a need to assess whether practitioners use evidence in their decision‐making, we assert that use of evidence is the last step in the evidence‐based approach. It is preceded by the generation (and documentation) of evidence through baseline condition assessment, proper goal setting, sound monitoring of the impacts of the chosen intervention as well as effective dissemination of resulting evidence. To answer the question whether restoration is evidence‐based would require the assessment of all stages from generation to use. We chose to start at the beginning, a logical place to start.