Self-reported and objectively assessed knowledge of evidence-based practice terminology among healthcare students: A cross-sectional study

Abstract

BackgroundSelf-reported scales and objective measurement tools are used to evaluate self-perceived and objective knowledge of evidence-based practice (EBP). Agreement between self-perceived and objective knowledge of EBP terminology has not been widely investigated among healthcare students.AimThe aim of this study was to examine agreement between self-reported and objectively assessed knowledge of EBP terminology among healthcare students. A secondary objective was to explore this agreement between students with different levels of EBP exposure.MethodsStudents in various healthcare disciplines and at different academic levels from Norway (n = 336) and Canada (n = 154) were invited to answer the Terminology domain items of the Evidence-Based Practice Profile (EBP2) questionnaire (self-reported), an additional item of ‘evidence based practice’ and six random open-ended questions (objective). The open-ended questions were scored on a five-level scoring rubric. Interrater agreement between self-reported and objective items was investigated with weighted kappa (Kw). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to estimate overall agreement.ResultsMean self-reported scores varied across items from 1.99 (‘forest plot’) to 4.33 (‘evidence-based practice’). Mean assessed open-ended answers varied from 1.23 (‘publication bias’) to 2.74 (‘evidence-based practice’). For all items, mean self-reported knowledge was higher than that assessed from open-ended answers (p<0.001). Interrater agreement between self-reported and assessed open-ended items varied (Kw = 0.04–0.69). The overall agreement for the EBP2 Terminology domain was poor (ICC = 0.29). The self-reported EBP2 Terminology domain discriminated between levels of EBP exposure.ConclusionAn overall low agreement was found between healthcare students’ self-reported and objectively assessed knowledge of EBP terminology. As a measurement tool, the EBP2 Terminology scale may be useful to differentiate between levels of EBP exposure. When using the scale as a discriminatory tool, for the purpose of academic promotion or clinical certification, users should be aware that self-ratings would be higher than objectively assessed knowledge.

Ranking of Risks for Existing and New Building Works

“…The root metaphor of contemporary, idiographic evidence-based practice is the three circles, also known as the three-legged stool: (a) the best available research evidence; (b) clinical expertise; and (c) patient values, preferences, characteristics, and circumstances [13]. Besides this, EBP typically involves four major activities: ask, acquire, appraise, and apply the research materials [14]. Among all the available evidence, a systematic review of the previous literature is considered the highest form of evidence, as it is a systematic search which identifies and summarises all of the available evidence to answer a research question [15].…”

How to Teach Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work: A Systematic Review

“…This is problematic for at least two reasons. First, as mentioned earlier, individuals tend to overestimate their knowledge (Kruger & Dunning, 1999;Snibsøer et al, 2018). And second, because the goal of EIs related Figure 4.…”

Knowledge, Behaviors, and Attitudes of Polish Nurses As Compared With Evidence-Based Practice in Relation to the Guidelines of the European Resuscitation Council

“…However, the self-reported knowledge, in average terms, was better in the case of students with high exposure to EBP compared to those with low EBP exposure. 19 Knowledge is an EBP characteristic which, as demonstrated, improves along with EBP training, and it may show similarity to clinical skills, with the increase resulting from higher activity level in the years immediately following graduation.…”

“…The study by Snibsøer et al demonstrated that the level of EBP-related knowledge increased in the years directly following graduation and was related to job seniority. 19 Snibsøer et al found a generally low correlation between self-assessed and objectively evaluated knowledge of EBP-related terminology in health-care students. There were no differences in the students' ability to understand the terminology relative to their high or low exposure to EBP.…”

“…The knowledge of EBP terminology and research methodology is a prerequisite for understanding the concept of EBP as well as for a critical assessment of research evidence and integration and use of evidence in clinical practice, with a major impact on patient safety. 19 In the context of EBP, all the recommendations and guidelines, including ERC guidelines, are a collection of most recent evidence available. EBP should be a standard in all nursing specialties, including emergency and intensive care nursing.…”