Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34919030›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2022

Self-perceived competencies on evidence-based medicine in medical students and physicians registered in a virtual course: a cross-sectional study.

Milton A Romero-Robles, David R Soriano-Moreno, Fabrizio M García-Gutiérrez, I Benjamín Condori-Meza, Caroline C Sing-Sánchez, Sandy P Bulnes Alvarez, Christoper A Alarcon-Ruiz, Alvaro Taype-Rondan, Andres Viteri-García

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Impact of the Zero Maternal Death by Hemorrhage Strategy on health professionals' self-perceived knowledge in managing postpartum hemorrhage.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Milton A Romero-RoblesEscuela de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Del Santa, Nuevo Chimbote, Ancash, Perú.ORCID 0000-0003-1629-1706
David R Soriano-MorenoComité Permanente Académico, Sociedad Científica Médico Estudiantil Peruana, Lima, Perú.ORCID 0000-0002-3690-0014
Fabrizio M García-GutiérrezComité Permanente Académico, Sociedad Científica Médico Estudiantil Peruana, Lima, Perú.ORCID 0000-0001-9210-7638
I Benjamín Condori-MezaComité Permanente Académico, Sociedad Científica Médico Estudiantil Peruana, Lima, Perú.ORCID 0000-0001-5348-1045
Caroline C Sing-SánchezEscuela de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Del Santa, Nuevo Chimbote, Ancash, Perú.ORCID 0000-0001-6307-4929
Sandy P Bulnes AlvarezComité Permanente Académico, Sociedad Científica Médico Estudiantil Peruana, Lima, Perú.ORCID 0000-0002-2287-1267
Christoper A Alarcon-RuizUnidad de Investigación Clínica y Epidemiológica, Escuela de Medicina, Universidad Peruana Unión, Lima, Perú.ORCID 0000-0003-3907-2784
Alvaro Taype-RondanUnidad de Investigación Clínica y Epidemiológica, Escuela de Medicina, Universidad Peruana Unión, Lima, Perú.ORCID 0000-0001-8758-0463
Andres Viteri-GarcíaCentro de Investigación de Salud Pública Y Epidemiología Clínica (Cispec). Facultad de Ciencias de La Salud Eugenio Espejo, Universidad Ute, Quito, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0003-0393-2404

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-based medicine (EBM) is defined as the integration of the best available evidence from scientific studies with clinical experience (and context) and with patients' values and preferences. The objective of the present study was to describe self-perceived EBM competencies in physicians and medical students enrolled in a massive virtual EBM course.

methodsAnalytical cross-sectional study. People interested in a free virtual EBM course fulfilled their data in a virtual form for their registration in September 2020. In this form, 22 competencies related to four dimensions of EBM were evaluated: asking a clinical question, search, analysis, and application; using a 5-option Likert scale. The resulting database was analyzed, selecting people who claimed to be physicians or medical students of 18 years or more.

results1793 participants were included: 1130 medical students and 663 physicians; more than 80% lived in Peru. The frequency of participants who agreed or strongly agreed with feeling qualified in each competence ranged: from 39.2% to 57.8% for the competencies of the 'Asking a clinical question' dimension, from 39.2% to 56.1% for 'Search,' from 19.9% to 32.0% for 'Analysis,' and from 19.6% to 29.9% for 'Application.' Both in physicians and students, the lowest frequencies were for the competencies of interpretation of impact measures, graphs, and results of systematic reviews; as well as shared decision making and calculation of expected benefit. Physicians who graduated more recently scored better on competencies from search and analysis dimensions.

conclusionAmong physicians and medical students enrolled in the course, self-perception of competencies was lower in the dimensions of analysis and application. More recently graduated physicians seem to have a greater self-perception of their research and analysis skills, probably due to curricular updates.

Indexed as

PhysiciansStudents, MedicalCross-Sectional StudiesEvidence-Based MedicineHumansSystematic Reviews as TopicEvidence-based medicineMedical educationMedical studentsphysiciansprofessional competence

Identifiers

PMID34919030
PMCPMC8725743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.