ArticlePloS one2026
Instruments that measure evidence-based practice knowledge, skills, and attitudes among health professions students: A systematic review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
backgroundEvidence-based practice (EBP) is recognized as a foundational element of health professional education worldwide. The Sicily Statement is a five-step model for both clinical practice and teaching EPB: Ask, Acquire, Appraise, Apply, Audit (or evaluate) [Dawes M, et al. BMC Med Educ. 5(1):1 (2005)]. Evaluating EBP competence in health professions' students is critical to develop strategies that build that competence and ultimately lead to optimal patient care. RATIONALE: There are many EBP measurement instruments that have been identified in previous reviews, but none that were intended for the health professions student population [Tilson JK, et al. BMC Med Educ. 11:78 (2011)].
objectiveThis systematic review aims to summarize and evaluate the measurement properties of existing instruments that evaluate health professions students' EBP competence including EBP knowledge, skills, and attitudes.
methodsThe systematic review was registered with PROSPERO under the identifier CRD42024564908. This systematic review will follow an adapted version of the eight-step process for systematic reviews for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)(3). The adaptations will align with the research question and EBP measurement instruments that are the primary target of this review. The search strategy will employ key words and phrases from the objective targeting following electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscuss, and PsycINFO, all via EBSCO. Nine psychometric measurement properties will act as the foundation for data extraction and evaluation of the measurement instruments. Data will be extracted and risk of bias will be completed on an individual study basis and on an EBP measurement instrument basis. A unique GRADE reporting system will be employed that accounts for a single conclusion based on a composite of the nine measurement properties and synthesized results from all studies.
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.