ArticlePloS one2018
Self-reported and objectively assessed knowledge of evidence-based practice terminology among healthcare students: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of NoteAid in a Community Hospital Setting: Randomized Trial of Electronic Health Record Note Comprehension Interventions With Patients.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Trial
- Commentary on "Comparative Analysis of Kegel Exercise Knowledge, Application, and Recommendation Between Physiotherapy and Nursing Students".International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Knowledge of Complementary Medicine and Therapies Among Family Physicians and the General Population in Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and skills towards evidence-based medicine among Palestinian undergraduate medical students: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Knowledge-to-practice gap in oral microbiome counseling: a mixed-methods study among dental practitioners in Saudi Arabia.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Enhancing beliefs and implementation of evidence-based practice among undergraduate nurses using a multi-component educational programme: a pre-post study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Conceptualization of pain in Croatian adults: a cross-sectional and psychometric study.Croatian medical journal · 2024Article
- Comparing Face-to-Face, Blended and Online Teaching Approaches for Practical Skill Acquisition: A Randomised Controlled Trial.Medical science educator · 2024Article
- Scientific approach, attitudes, and perspectives on research among Swedish physiotherapy students-a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Article
- Refining and adapting the measurement properties of evidence-based practice measures for physiotherapy students.PloS one · 2024Article
- Translating and Validating the Vietnamese Version of the Health Sciences Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Does place matter in the implementation of an evidence-based program policy in an Australian place-based initiative for children?Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Knowledge about foot-specific foot falls risk factors and exercise among physiotherapists in the UK and Portugal: A cross-sectional survey.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2022Article
- Capability building for large-scale transformational change: learning from an evaluation of a national programme.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
- Questionnaire to Evaluate the Competency in Evidence-Based Practice of Registered Nurses (EBP-COQ Prof©): Development and Psychometric Validation.Worldviews on evidence-based nursing · 2020Article
- Development and Validation of a Test for Competence in Evidence-Based Medicine.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Article
- Knowledge, Behaviors, and Attitudes of Polish Nurses As Compared With Evidence-Based Practice in Relation to the Guidelines of the European Resuscitation Council.Global advances in health and medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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.
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.