ArticleThe Journal of chiropractic education2015
Development and psychometric evaluation of an information literacy self-efficacy survey and an information literacy knowledge test.
Article in The Journal of chiropractic education, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A needs assessment survey for improving library support for chiropractic faculty research.The Journal of chiropractic education · 2026Article
- Measuring evidence-based practice knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behavior in students of manual therapy education programs: A scoping review of instruments and their measurement properties.The Journal of chiropractic education · 2024Article
- Designing of clinical information update system for clinicians on Covid-19: A commentary.Journal of education and health promotion · 2020Article
- Developing occupational therapy students' information and historical literacy competencies: an interprofessional collaborative project.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and psychometrically evaluate an information literacy (IL) self-efficacy survey and an IL knowledge test.
methodsIn this test-retest reliability study, a 25-item IL self-efficacy survey and a 50-item IL knowledge test were developed and administered to a convenience sample of 53 chiropractic students. Item analyses were performed on all questions.
resultsThe IL self-efficacy survey demonstrated good reliability (test-retest correlation = 0.81) and good/very good internal consistency (mean κ = .56 and Cronbach's α = .92). A total of 25 questions with the best item analysis characteristics were chosen from the 50-item IL knowledge test, resulting in a 25-item IL knowledge test that demonstrated good reliability (test-retest correlation = 0.87), very good internal consistency (mean κ = .69, KR20 = 0.85), and good item discrimination (mean point-biserial = 0.48).
conclusionsThis study resulted in the development of three instruments: a 25-item IL self-efficacy survey, a 50-item IL knowledge test, and a 25-item IL knowledge test. The information literacy self-efficacy survey and the 25-item version of the information literacy knowledge test have shown preliminary evidence of adequate reliability and validity to justify continuing study with these instruments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.