I am going to disagree. 'Do your research' doesn't mean you will be well-informed. How many patients can understand publications on the literature and the jargon involved? Do they know what p=/C.I/RR means? Or how about the differences between a retro and obs study?

Anecdotally, a colleague had a patient bring him a printed PubMed article about something. The patient demanded the treatment in that PubMed article.

I looked at the article, and it was from a trash journal, with huge amounts of red flags (eg: C.I was all over the place, self-reporting, no blood work. Diagnosis was suspect from the start, and the authors had a financial interest in the treatment)

The patient didn't want to her any.