ArticleBMC health services research2018
Reported use of evidence in clinical practice: a survey of rehabilitation practices in Norway.
Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Instruments measuring evidence-based practice behavior, attitudes, and self-efficacy among healthcare professionals: a systematic review of measurement properties.Implementation science : IS · 2023Pooled it
- A qualitative descriptive study to explore evaluation and effects of partnered rehabilitation research in Canada.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders and physiotherapy utilization in primary care - a registry-based study in Sweden.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Perspectives on how evidence-based practice changes over time: A qualitative exploration of occupational therapy and physical therapy graduates.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy related to evidence-based practice among healthcare professionals working in the municipal healthcare service in Norway: a cross-sectional survey.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Adaptation and validation of the evidence-based practice profile (EBPBMC medical education · 2024Article
- Knowledge Translation Task Force for core measures clinical practice guideline: a short report on the process and utilization.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- Adherence to evidence-based practice across healthcare professionals in Germany: results from a cross-sectional, nationwide survey.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Physiotherapists' Evidence-Based Practice profiles by HS-EBP questionnaire in Spain: A cross-sectional normative study.PloS one · 2022Article
- Implementation of an Acute Care COPD Exacerbation Patient Mobilization Tool. A Mixed-Methods Study.ATS scholar · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe South Eastern Health Region in Norway serves approximately 2.8 million people, which is more than half of Norway's population. Physical medicine and rehabilitation services are provided by 9 public hospital trusts and 30 private rehabilitation facilities. The purposes of this study were to conduct a psychometric analysis of the EBP Implementation Scale (EBPIS) and describe rehabilitation clinicians' self-reported 1) use of evidence-based practices (EBPs), 2) use of EBPs across hospitals, and 3) determine factors associated with use of EBPs in the South Eastern Health Region in Norway.
methodsA cross-sectional study using an online survey was conducted with public hospitals and private rehabilitation centers. The survey, which was distributed throughout the region, included the EBPIS, 8 questions related to EBP in the health region, and demographics. Response frequencies were calculated and described. Internal consistency and factor structure of the EBPIS and its subscales were determined. Associations and differences in groups with similar demographics, EBPIS scores, and use of EBPs were identified.
resultsA total of 316 individuals completed the survey, including allied health clinicians, nurses, psychologists, social workers, and physicians. The EBPIS mean score was 30/72. A factor analysis identified that the EBPIS can be divided into 3 subscales: literature search and critical appraisal (α = .80), knowledge sharing (α = .83), and practice evaluation (α = .74). EBP activities reported were primarily related to literature searches, critical appraisal, and discussing evidence. Approximately 65 and 75% of respondents agreed that the same OMs and evidence based interventions were used within the local clinic respectively. Fewer agreed that the same OMs (13%) and evidence-based interventions (39%) are used regionally.
conclusionThe EBPIS and its subscales demonstrated excellent internal consistency. Practice variability exists in rehabilitation throughout Southeastern Norway. An increased emphasis on use of EBP throughout the region is needed.
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.