ArticleLa Medicina del lavoro2024
Psychometric Evaluation of a Measure of Evidence-Based Practice in Occupational Health.
Article in La Medicina del lavoro, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOccupational Health Services (OHS) are obliged to follow the principles of evidence-based medicine. However, there needs to be tools to measure this. Therefore, we developed and validated a questionnaire for evaluating OHS practitioners' attitudes, competence, and organisational support to perform evidence-based practice (EBP-OHS) following the JBI Model of Evidence-Based Healthcare.
methodsThe questionnaire's content validity was assessed by 12 experts in the field. Then, an opportunity sample of 549 OHS practitioners completed the questionnaire. We examined the questionnaire's psychometric properties using exploratory factor analysis and subjected it to construct validity and reliability testing.
resultsThe content validity index of the chosen items was 0.78 or higher. Exploratory factor analysis revealed that the measure's construct validity was adequate (KMO 0.9). Principal component factor analysis supported a three-factor structure (all eigenvalues 1.3 or more), which explained 60.3 % of the total variance. Aligned with these three factors, the EBP-OHS consists of three domains: Organisational support (seven items), OHS practitioners' competence (six items) and OHS practitioners' attitudes (two items). The scale's reliability is good (Cronbach alpha 0.88).
conclusionsThe EBP-OHS is a valid tool for measuring occupational health services' evidence-based practice and enabling the implementation of research into practice. It embodies the phases of evidence transfer and implementation described in the JBI Model of Evidence-Based Healthcare and translates them into concrete measurable activities in the OHS context.
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.