Adaptation and Validation of the Fresno Test of Competence in Evidence-Based Medicine in Doctor of Pharmacy Students

Coppenrath, Valerie; Filosa, Lee Anne; Akselrod, Elizabeth; Carey, Katherine

doi:10.5688/ajpe816106

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Knowledge and skills 1,2,3 The Fresno test was originally developed and validated to assess medical professionals’ knowledge and skills in EBP, however, it has been adapted for use in other health disciplines (e.g. occupational therapy [ 37 ], physical therapy [ 38 ], and pharmacy [ 39 ]) and in other languages (e.g. Brazilian-Portuguese version [ 40 ]).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence-based practice educational intervention studies: a systematic review of what is taught and how it is measured

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDespite the established interest in evidence-based practice (EBP) as a core competence for clinicians, evidence for how best to teach and evaluate EBP remains weak. We sought to systematically assess coverage of the five EBP steps, review the outcome domains measured, and assess the properties of the instruments used in studies evaluating EBP educational interventions.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of controlled studies (i.e. studies with a separate control group) which had investigated the effect of EBP educational interventions. We used citation analysis technique and tracked the forward and backward citations of the index articles (i.e. the systematic reviews and primary studies included in an overview of the effect of EBP teaching) using Web of Science until May 2017. We extracted information on intervention content (grouped into the five EBP steps), and the outcome domains assessed. We also searched the literature for published reliability and validity data of the EBP instruments used.ResultsOf 1831 records identified, 302 full-text articles were screened, and 85 included. Of these, 46 (54%) studies were randomised trials, 51 (60%) included postgraduate level participants, and 63 (75%) taught medical professionals. EBP Step 3 (critical appraisal) was the most frequently taught step (63 studies; 74%). Only 10 (12%) of the studies taught content which addressed all five EBP steps. Of the 85 studies, 52 (61%) evaluated EBP skills, 39 (46%) knowledge, 35 (41%) attitudes, 19 (22%) behaviours, 15 (18%) self-efficacy, and 7 (8%) measured reactions to EBP teaching delivery. Of the 24 instruments used in the included studies, 6 were high-quality (achieved ≥3 types of established validity evidence) and these were used in 14 (29%) of the 52 studies that measured EBP skills; 14 (41%) of the 39 studies that measured EBP knowledge; and 8 (26%) of the 35 studies that measured EBP attitude.ConclusionsMost EBP educational interventions which have been evaluated in controlled studies focus on teaching only some of the EBP steps (predominantly critically appraisal of evidence) and did not use high-quality instruments to measure outcomes. Educational packages and instruments which address all EBP steps are needed to improve EBP teaching.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-018-1284-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence-based practice educational intervention studies: a systematic review of what is taught and how it is measured

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We were advised by an expert on questionnaires of the department of Medical Decision Making of the LUMC and by an expert of the education and training Directorate of the LUMC. Additionally, we compared questionnaires with . Knowledge of the care providers was examined using vignettes, whereby the respondents had to apply their available knowledge .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge, attitude and practices of obstetric care providers towards maternal red‐blood‐cell immunization during pregnancy

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objectives A successful routine RBC alloantibody screening programme should not lead to unnecessary emotional burden during pregnancy due to inadequate counselling on the risk of severe haemolytic disease of the foetus and the newborn (HDFN). Rareness of this disease may result in insufficient knowledge and subsequent inadequate information transfer to women, diagnosed with RBC antibodies. We investigated the current knowledge, views and experiences of Dutch obstetric care providers regarding RBC alloimmunization during pregnancy. Materials and methodsWe performed a quantitative cross-sectional study, using a structured digital questionnaire to measure knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) regarding maternal RBC alloimmunization among Dutch obstetric care providers in 2016.Results About 10% of obstetric care providers completed the questionnaire. A sufficient level of knowledge was found in 7% of all participants (N = 329). Knowledge about RhD immunisation and prophylaxis was sufficient in 60% of the responders. Knowledge gaps were found concerning the relevance of non-RhD RBC antibodies, the indications for giving extra RhD prophylaxis and the interpretation of laboratory test results. Healthcare providers estimated their own level of knowledge 'sufficient' (primary/secondary care) to 'good' (tertiary care), and all participants considered their professional role important within the screening programme.Conclusion Dutch obstetric care providers showed a lack of knowledge regarding maternal RBC immunization. Awareness of the lack of knowledge is necessary to help obstetric care providers to be careful in giving information and even to decide to contact the expert centre before counselling the patient.Key words: blood groups, haemolytic disease of the foetus and newborn, quality management, RBC antigens and antibodies. Correspondence

show abstract

“…Evidence-based Medicine (EbM) represents the practical search for and the application of the best available evidence to act properly in clinical situations [1][2][3][4]. Practising EbM combines individual internal clinical expertise with external evidence from systematic research and applies it to make decisions for individual patients [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although many instruments exist for evaluating EbM curriculum effectiveness [5][6][7], only two − the Fresno Test (FT) [8] and the Berlin Questionnaire (BQ) [7,9] − are well represented. These two tests have been frequently tested and show good validity and reliability and they cover a broad range of EbM knowledge and skills [2,[5][6][7]. Both tests are defined as Level 1 instruments, which are characterised by the capability to discriminate between different training levels or performances [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For this reason, similar to other studies [2,6,17], we performed an adaptation and validation process of an already examined questionnaire to create a new form for the target group of dental students/ dentists. We chose the BQ (here called Berlin Questionnaire Medical = BQM) as a starting point for our instrument because rather than open-ended responses, it requires only the identification of the correct answer from a list.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adaptation and validation of the Berlin questionnaire of competence in evidence-based dentistry for dental students: a pilot study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The purpose of this pilot study was to create a valid and reliable set of assessment questions for examining Evidence-based Dentistry (EbD) knowledge. For this reason, we adapted and validated for dental students the Berlin Questionnaire (BQ), which assesses Evidence-based Medicine (EbM) abilities. Methods: The Berlin Questionnaire was validated with medical residents. We adapted it for use in a dentistry setting. An expert panel reviewed the adapted BQ for content validity. A cross-sectional cohort representing four training levels (EbD-novice dental students, EbD-trained dental students, dentists, and EbM−/EbD-expert faculty) completed the questionnaire. A total of 140 participants comprised the validation set. Internal reliability, item difficulty and item discrimination were assessed. Construct validity was assessed by comparing the mean total scores of students to faculty and comparing proportions of students and faculty who passed each item. Results: Among the 133 participants (52 EbD-novice dental students, 53 EbD-trained dental students, 12 dentists, and 16 EbM-/ EbD-expert faculty), a statistically significant (p < 0.001) difference was evident in the total score corresponding to the training level. The total score reliability and psychometric properties of items modified for discipline-specific content were acceptable. Cronbach's alpha was 0.648. Conclusion: The adapted Berlin Questionnaire is a reliable and valid instrument to assess competence in Evidencebased Dentistry in dental students. Future research will focus on refining the instrument further.

show abstract

Adaptation and Validation of the Fresno Test of Competence in Evidence-Based Medicine in Doctor of Pharmacy Students

Cited by 16 publications

References 27 publications

Evidence-based practice educational intervention studies: a systematic review of what is taught and how it is measured

Evidence-based practice educational intervention studies: a systematic review of what is taught and how it is measured

Knowledge, attitude and practices of obstetric care providers towards maternal red‐blood‐cell immunization during pregnancy

Adaptation and validation of the Berlin questionnaire of competence in evidence-based dentistry for dental students: a pilot study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About