Trial reportBMC medical education2015
Measuring evidence-based practice knowledge and skills in occupational therapy--a brief instrument.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01512823 (Randomised Trial of the Effectiveness of Two Educational Interventions to Improve Evidence-based Practice Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviour in Occupational Therapists), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Randomised Trial of the Effectiveness of Two Educational Interventions to Improve Evidence-based Practice Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviour in Occupational Therapists
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Qualitative Study of the Barriers and Opportunities for Adoption of Web-Portals for Doctors and Patients in Russia.Journal of medical systems · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundValid and reliable instruments are required to measure the effect of educational interventions to improve evidence-based practice (EBP) knowledge and skills in occupational therapy. The aims of this paper are to: 1) describe amendments to the Adapted Fresno Test of Competence in EBP (AFT), and 2) report the psychometric properties of the modified instrument when used with South African occupational therapists.
methodsThe clinical utility of the AFT was evaluated for use with South African occupational therapists and modifications made. The modified AFT was used in two studies to assess its reliability and validity. In Study 1 a convenience sample of 26 occupational therapists in private practice or government-funded health facilities in a South African province were recruited to complete the modified AFT on two occasions 1 week apart. Completed questionnaires were scored independently by two raters. Inter-rater, test-retest reliability and internal consistency were determined. Study 2 was a pragmatic randomised controlled trial involving occupational therapists in four Western Cape Department of Health district municipalities (n = 58). Therapists were randomised in matched pairs to one of two educational interventions (interactive or didactic), and completed the modified AFT at baseline and 12 weeks after the intervention. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed. Data were not normally distributed, thus non-parametric statistics were used.
resultsIn Study 1, 21 of 26 participants completed the questionnaire twice. Test-retest (ICC = 0.95, 95 % CI = 0.88-0.98) and inter-rater reliability (Time 1: ICC = 0.995, 95 % CI = 0.99-0.998; Time 2: ICC = 0.99, 95 % CI = 0.97-0.995) were excellent for total scores. Internal consistency based on time 1 scores was satisfactory (α = 0.70). In Study 2, 28 participants received an interactive educational intervention and completed the modified AFT at baseline and 12 weeks later. Median total SAFT scores increased significantly from baseline to 12-weeks (Z = -4.078, p < 0.001) with a moderate effect size (r = 0.55).
conclusionThe modified AFT has demonstrated validity for detecting differences in EBP knowledge between two groups. It also has excellent test-retest and inter-rater reliability. The instrument is recommended for contexts where EBP is an emerging approach and time is at a premium.
trial registrationPan African Controlled Trials Register PACTR201201000346141 . Registered 31 January 2012. Clinical Trials NCT01512823 . Registered 1 February 2012. South African National Clinical Trial Register DOH2710093067 . Registered 27 October 2009.
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.