Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40401510›Full record

SynthesisMedical education online2025

Approaches to teaching evidence-based medicine in residency: a systematic review.

Kathleen Mathieson, Megan Weemer, Laura Lipke

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medical education online, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Kathleen MathiesonCollege of Graduate Health Studies, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7245-1498
Megan WeemerCollege of Graduate Health Studies, A.T. Still University, Mesa, AZ, USA.
Laura LipkeHealth Sciences Librarian, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies of evidence-based medicine (EBM) curricula in graduate medical education are common, but little consensus exists on the best methods to teach EBM.

objectiveThe purpose of the current study was to evaluate EBM teaching approaches for graduate medical trainees and to update a 2014 systematic review.

methodsWe conducted a systematic literature search of major health and education databases for articles published from January 2014 through October 2022. Articles were independently screened to ensure they described an experimental or quasi-experimental evaluation of EBM teaching for graduate medical trainees. Quality of included studies was appraised using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument. Data were extracted and synthesized using Coomarasamy and Khan's hierarchy of EBM teaching and learning.

resultsOver 1400 articles were screened; 35 met eligibility criteria and were included in our review. Interactive, classroom-based teaching approaches were most common (23/35, 66%). Only 2 (6%) studies used a clinically integrated teaching approach. Most studies reported positive short-term outcomes in EBM knowledge, skills, attitudes, or learner satisfaction. Few studies evaluated EBM behaviors, and none measured long-term application of EBM principles.

conclusionsReviewed studies had low to moderate study quality, often limited by small sample size and lack of validated measures. Although commonly encouraged as a teaching approach, few studies used clinically integrated EBM teaching. Instead of reporting individual, site-specific efforts, future studies should examine the broader culture of EBM in graduate medical education and prioritize sustained application of EBM into practice as a key outcome.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, GraduateEvidence-Based MedicineInternship and ResidencyCurriculumHumansTeachingevidence-based medicineevidence-based practicefellowshipGraduate medical educationresidencyteaching and learning

Identifiers

PMID40401510
PMCPMC12100962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.