ArticleSultan Qaboos University medical journal2025
Evidence-Based Medicine:
Article in Sultan Qaboos University medical journal, 2025. 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
Objectives: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) provides a systematic method for navigating an extensive repository of information and making well-informed judgements regarding patient care. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical knowledge, attitudes and practices related to EBM among medical students and interns in Oman and to identify gaps between general awareness and comprehension. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted from September 2023 to February 2024 at Sultan Qaboos University. An online survey incorporating the Noor Evidence-Based Medicine Questionnaire was used to evaluate knowledge, attitudes and practices related to EBM. Responses were scored using a 5-point Likert scale. Results: A total of 230 medical students and interns completed the survey (response rate = 46%; the optimal sample size was determined to be 218 participants). The participants' mean age was 24.2 ± 1.5 years, with the majority being female (n = 124, 53.9%). Most participants (n = 191, 83%) indicated having previously received EBM training. Overall, participants demonstrated poor levels of EBM-related knowledge (mean percent score: 53.3 ± 5.7%), moderate attitudes (63.5 ± 7.6%) and poor practices (35.3 ± 7.4%). Specifically, 85.7% demonstrated moderate levels of EBM-related knowledge, 71.3% revealed neutral attitudes and 60% reported fair practices. No significant relationships were observed between prior EBM training history and knowledge, attitude or practice scores. However, a significant association was found between the knowledge domain and the level of study ( Conclusions: The study's findings highlight the deficiencies in the current understanding of EBM among Omani medical students and interns. Further studies should investigate specific aspects such as the hours, topics and teaching methodologies used to provide EBM instruction. This will help identify gaps and devise mechanisms to improve knowledge retention.
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.