The article examines the contradiction between the biopsychosocial approach and evidence-based medicine. The traditional biomedical model, that has been dominating since the 17th century, focuses on pathophysiology and ignores the psychological and social factors. The alternative biopsychosocial model, offered by Engel G (1970–1990), treats a disease as a result of interacting biological, psychological and social factors. It corresponds to the definition of health provided by the WHO. The approach is, however, limited due to highly personalized nature, complex objective assessment of factors and risk of subjectivism. As evidence-based medicine became widespread, clinical focus transitioned toward statistically average patient populations. Consequently, this standardization minimized the individual differences, particularly psychosocial factors. The doctor-patient relationship becomes mechanistic. The authors stress that the biopsychosocial and evidence-based approaches cannot be opposed. Their synthesis is perspective. They rely on evidence-based data taking into account psychosocial characteristics of a patient. They include various integration options from the way the multidisciplinary team functions to the formation of the basis of patient’s profiles indicating psychosocial features. The central idea that unites three groups of factors as viewed by the patients includes the internal picture of illness. The complex approach is taken as an essential element of modern clinical thinking and medical culture.