Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36317552›Full record

ArticleACR open rheumatology2023

An Instrument for Measuring Critical Appraisal Self-Efficacy in Rheumatology Trainees.

Juliet Aizer, Erika L Abramson, Jessica R Berman, Stephen A Paget, Marianna B Frey, Victoria Cooley, Ying Li, Katherine L Hoffman, Julie A Schell, Michael D Tiongson and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 79% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Juliet AizerWeill Cornell Medicine and Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3429-4206
Erika L AbramsonWeill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
Jessica R BermanWeill Cornell Medicine and Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.
Stephen A PagetWeill Cornell Medicine and Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.
Marianna B FreyUniversity of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, New York.
Victoria CooleyWeill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
Ying LiWeill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
Katherine L HoffmanWeill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
Julie A SchellThe University of Texas at Austin, and Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Michael D TiongsonUniversity of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York.
Myriam A LinHospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.
Lisa A MandlWeill Cornell Medicine and Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6085-8664
Hospital for Special Surgery · USCornell University · USHarvard University · USUniversity of Rochester · USUniversity of Rochester Medical Center · US

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR001873 · NCATS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI REILLY, MUREDACH P · 2016 to 2025
$99.0M
Disparities in COVID Disease Severity and Outcomes in New York CityUL1TR002384 · NCATS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI JULIANNE L IMPERATO-MCGINLEY · 2017 to 2026
$86.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001873NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002384
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSelf-efficacy, the internal belief that one can perform a specific task successfully, influences behavior. To promote critical appraisal of medical literature, rheumatology training programs should foster both competence and self-efficacy for critical appraisal. This study aimed to investigate whether select items from the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI), an instrument measuring clinical research self-efficacy, could be used to measure critical appraisal self-efficacy (CASE).

methodsOne hundred twenty-five trainees from 33 rheumatology programs were sent a questionnaire that included two sections of the CRAI. Six CRAI items relevant to CASE were identified a priori; responses generated a CASE score (total score range 0-10; higher = greater confidence in one's ability to perform a specific task successfully). CASE scores' internal structure and relation to domain-concordant variables were analyzed.

resultsQuestionnaires were completed by 112 of 125 (89.6%) trainees. CASE scores ranged from 0.5 to 8.2. The six CRAI items contributing to the CASE score demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.95) and unidimensionality. Criterion validity was supported by the findings that participants with higher CASE scores rated their epidemiology and biostatistics understanding higher than that of peers (P < 0.0001) and were more likely to report referring to studies to answer clinical questions (odds ratio 2.47, 95% confidence interval 1.41-4.33; P = 0.002). The correlation of CASE scores with percentage of questions answered correctly was only moderate, supporting discriminant validity.

conclusionThe six-item CASE instrument demonstrated content validity, internal consistency, discriminative capability, and criterion validity, including correlation with self-reported behavior, supporting its potential as a useful measure of critical appraisal self-efficacy.

Identifiers

PMID36317552
PMCPMC9837389
OpenAlexW4307845618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.