Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Background Access to valid and reliable instruments is essential in the field of implementation science, where the measurement of factors associated with healthcare professionals’ uptake of EBP is central. The Norwegian version of the Evidence-based practice profile questionnaire (EBP2-N) measures EBP constructs, such as EBP knowledge, confidence, attitudes, and behavior. Despite its potential utility, the EBP2-N requires further validation before being used in a cross-sectional survey targeting different healthcare professionals in Norwegian primary healthcare. This study assessed the content validity, construct validity, and internal consistency of the EBP2-N among Norwegian primary healthcare professionals. Methods To evaluate the content validity of the EBP2-N, we conducted qualitative individual interviews with eight healthcare professionals in primary healthcare from different disciplines. Qualitative data was analyzed using the “text summary” model, followed by panel group discussions, minor linguistic changes, and a pilot test of the revised version. To evaluate construct validity (structural validity) and internal consistency, we used data from a web-based cross-sectional survey among nurses, assistant nurses, physical therapists, occupational therapists, medical doctors, and other professionals (n = 313). Structural validity was tested using a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the original five-factor structure, and Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to assess internal consistency. Results The qualitative interviews with primary healthcare professionals indicated that the content of the EBP2-N was perceived to reflect the constructs intended to be measured by the instrument. However, interviews revealed concerns regarding the formulation of some items, leading to minor linguistic revisions. In addition, several participants expressed that some of the most specific research terms in the terminology domain felt less relevant to them in clinical practice. CFA results exposed partial alignment with the original five-factor model, with the following model fit indices: CFI = 0.749, RMSEA = 0.074, and SRMR = 0.075. Cronbach’s alphas ranged between 0.82 and 0.95 for all domains except for the Sympathy domain (0.69), indicating good internal consistency in four out of five domains. Conclusion The EBP2-N is a suitable instrument for measuring Norwegian primary healthcare professionals’ EBP knowledge, attitudes, confidence, and behavior. Although EBP2-N seems to be an adequate instrument in its current form, we recommend that future research focuses on further assessing the factor structure, evaluating the relevance of the items, and the number of items needed. Registration Retrospectively registered (prior to data analysis) in OSF Preregistration. Registration DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/428RP.
Background Access to valid and reliable instruments is essential in the field of implementation science, where the measurement of factors associated with healthcare professionals’ uptake of EBP is central. The Norwegian version of the Evidence-based practice profile questionnaire (EBP2-N) measures EBP constructs, such as EBP knowledge, confidence, attitudes, and behavior. Despite its potential utility, the EBP2-N requires further validation before being used in a cross-sectional survey targeting different healthcare professionals in Norwegian primary healthcare. This study assessed the content validity, construct validity, and internal consistency of the EBP2-N among Norwegian primary healthcare professionals. Methods To evaluate the content validity of the EBP2-N, we conducted qualitative individual interviews with eight healthcare professionals in primary healthcare from different disciplines. Qualitative data was analyzed using the “text summary” model, followed by panel group discussions, minor linguistic changes, and a pilot test of the revised version. To evaluate construct validity (structural validity) and internal consistency, we used data from a web-based cross-sectional survey among nurses, assistant nurses, physical therapists, occupational therapists, medical doctors, and other professionals (n = 313). Structural validity was tested using a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the original five-factor structure, and Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to assess internal consistency. Results The qualitative interviews with primary healthcare professionals indicated that the content of the EBP2-N was perceived to reflect the constructs intended to be measured by the instrument. However, interviews revealed concerns regarding the formulation of some items, leading to minor linguistic revisions. In addition, several participants expressed that some of the most specific research terms in the terminology domain felt less relevant to them in clinical practice. CFA results exposed partial alignment with the original five-factor model, with the following model fit indices: CFI = 0.749, RMSEA = 0.074, and SRMR = 0.075. Cronbach’s alphas ranged between 0.82 and 0.95 for all domains except for the Sympathy domain (0.69), indicating good internal consistency in four out of five domains. Conclusion The EBP2-N is a suitable instrument for measuring Norwegian primary healthcare professionals’ EBP knowledge, attitudes, confidence, and behavior. Although EBP2-N seems to be an adequate instrument in its current form, we recommend that future research focuses on further assessing the factor structure, evaluating the relevance of the items, and the number of items needed. Registration Retrospectively registered (prior to data analysis) in OSF Preregistration. Registration DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/428RP.
Background Evidence-based medicine is defined as searching for medical information, reviewing and comparing it to each patient’s situation, and then judging the optimal decision. We aimed to measure the psychometric properties of the Evidence-Based Performance Profile (EBP 2 ) Questionnaire among the students of health-related fields at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2021. The EBP2 questionnaire, which includes 74 five-Likert-scale items, was translated into the Persian language using the forward-backward translation method. A panel of five experts approved the face, content, and structural validity of the questionnaire. The Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s Omega coefficients were utilized to assess the questionnaire’s internal consistency. Furthermore, both confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were used to assess the questionnaire’s construct validity. SPSS software version 25 and LISREL software version 8.8 were used for statistical analysis. Results Overall, 339 students participated in this study. The cultural adaptability, linguistic equivalence, and content validity of the Persian version of the EBP 2 questionnaire were approved by a five-member team of medical experts. In addition, the results showed excellent internal consistency of the Persian version of the EBP 2 questionnaire (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.962, McDonald’s Omega (ML) = 0.963). Moreover, all domains had acceptable reliability (> 0.7), except the Practice domain which had a marginally acceptable Cronbach’s alpha coefficient equal to 0.686. Exploratory factor analysis discovered six domains for the questionnaire. Moreover, the confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that all indices except the comparative fit index (CFI) and adjusted goodness of fit (AGFI) confirmed the validity of the EBP 2 questionnaire. Conclusion The study’s findings indicate that the Persian translated of the EBP2 questionnaire exhibited satisfactory validity and reliability for assessing students’ evidence-based performance in health-related fields.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.