ArticleBMC nursing2020
Measures of evidence-informed decision-making competence attributes: a psychometric systematic review.
Article in BMC nursing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment instruments for e-professionalism in healthcare: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled 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
- Development and content validation of a measure to assess evidence-informed decision-making competence in public health nursing.PloS one · 2021Trial
- Psychometric assessment of the Competence in Research Utilisation instrument in a sample of graduating nursing students in three European countries.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2026Article
- Article
- Initial Validation and Psychometric Properties of the Croatian Version of the Pieper-Zulkowski Pressure Ulcer Knowledge Test.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Development and testing of the capacity of organisations for system practices scale.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025Article
- Research utilization competency development in the health workforce pipeline: Design and formative evaluation of learning objectives for health professions students.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- 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
- Adaptation and validation of the evidence-based practice profile (EBPBMC medical education · 2024Article
- Facilitating Utilization of Evidence-Informed Management by Nurse Managers in Healthcare Facilities: An Integrative Literature Review.Journal of nursing management · 2024Review
- Interventions to enhance the use of Evidence Based Decision Making for Quality Care among Nurses: A Systematic Review.The East African health research journal · 2024Review
- Professional Values and Self-Reported Clinical Competence of Acute Care Nurses in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2023Article
- Knowledge and Awareness of Rare Diseases Among Healthcare Professionals in the Kingdom of Bahrain.Cureus · 2023Article
- Analysis of Healthcare Professionals' and Institutions' Roles in Twitter Colostomy Information.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Health Literacy and Critical Lecture as Key Elements to Detect and Reply to Nutrition Misinformation on Social Media: Analysis between Spanish Healthcare Professionals.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Validity, reliability, and acceptability of the Evidence-Informed Decision-Making (EIDM) competence measure.PloS one · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe current state of evidence regarding measures that assess evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) competence attributes (i.e., knowledge, skills, attitudes/beliefs, behaviours) among nurses is unknown. This systematic review provides a narrative synthesis of the psychometric properties and general characteristics of EIDM competence attribute measures in nursing.
methodsThe search strategy included online databases, hand searches, grey literature, and content experts. To align with the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews, psychometric outcome data (i.e., acceptability, reliability, validity) were extracted in duplicate, while all remaining data (i.e., study and measure characteristics) were extracted by one team member and checked by a second member for accuracy. Acceptability data was defined as measure completion time and overall rate of missing data. The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing was used as the guiding framework to define reliability, and validity evidence, identified as a unified concept comprised of four validity sources: content, response process, internal structure and relationships to other variables. A narrative synthesis of measure and study characteristics, and psychometric outcomes is presented across measures and settings.
resultsA total of 5883 citations were screened with 103 studies and 35 unique measures included in the review. Measures were used or tested in acute care (
conclusionsThis review highlights a gap in the testing and use of competence attribute measures related to evidence-informed decision making in community-based and long-term care settings. Further development of measures is needed conceptually and psychometrically, as most measures assess only a single competence attribute, and lack assessment and evidence of reliability and sources of established validity evidence. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO #CRD42018088754.
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.