The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Instruments for Evaluating Education in Evidence-Based Practice: A Systematic Review
Abstract
CONTEXT: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is the integration of the best research evidence with patients' values and clinical circumstances in clinical decision making. Teaching of EBP should be evaluated and guided by evidence of its own effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: To appraise, summarize, and describe currently available EBP teaching evaluation instruments. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HAPI, and ERIC databases; reference lists of retrieved articles; EBP Internet sites; and 8 education journals from 1980 through April 2006. For inclusion, studies had to report an instrument evaluating EBP, contain sufficient description to permit analysis, and present quantitative results of administering the instrument. DATA EXTRACTION: Two raters independently abstracted information on the development, format, learner levels, evaluation domains, feasibility, reliability, and validity of the EBP evaluation instruments from each article. We defined 3 levels of instruments based on the type, extent, methods, and results of psychometric testing and suitability for different evaluation purposes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 347 articles identified, 115 were included, representing 104 unique instruments. The instruments were most commonly administered to medical students and postgraduate trainees and evaluated EBP skills. Among EBP skills, acquiring evidence and appraising evidence were most commonly evaluated, but newer instruments evaluated asking answerable questions and applying evidence to individual patients. Most behavior instruments measured the performance of EBP steps in practice but newer instruments documented the performance of evidence-based clinical maneuvers or patient-level outcomes. At least 1 type of validity evidence was demonstrated for 53% of instruments, but 3 or more types of validity evidence were established for only 10%. High-quality instruments were identified for evaluating the EBP competence of individual trainees, determining the effectiveness of EBP curricula, and assessing EBP behaviors with objective outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Instruments with reasonable validity are available for evaluating some domains of EBP and may be targeted to different evaluation needs. Further development and testing is required to evaluate EBP attitudes, behaviors, and more recently articulated EBP skills.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States
McGlynn, E. A., Asch, S. M., Adams, J., Keesey, J., Hicks, J., DeCristofaro, A., & Kerr, E. A. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa022615 · Cited by 5,079
The well-built clinical question: A key to evidence-based decisions
(1995) · ACP Journal Club · doi:10.7326/acpjc-1995-123-3-a12 · Cited by 2,931
Validity: on the meaningful interpretation of assessment data
Downing, S. M. (2003) · Medical Education · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003.01594.x · Cited by 1,434
McKibbon, K. A., Haynes, R. B., Walker Dilks, C. J., Ramsden, M. F., Ryan, N. C., Baker, L., Flemming, T., & Fitzgerald, D. (1990) · Computers and Biomedical Research · doi:10.1016/0010-4809(90)90042-b · Cited by 108
Cited by
Undergraduate medical research: the student perspective
Burgoyne, L. N., O'Flynn, S., & Boylan, G. B. (2010) · Medical Education Online · doi:10.3402/meo.v15i0.5212 · Cited by 300
What Are the Effects of Teaching Evidence-Based Health Care (EBHC)? Overview of Systematic Reviews
Young, T., Rohwer, A., Volmink, J., & Clarke, M. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0086706 · Cited by 254
Toward a theory of evidence based decision making
Baba, V. V., & HakemZadeh, F. (2012) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/00251741211227546 · Cited by 167
Squires, J. E., Estabrooks, C. A., O'Rourke, H. M., Gustavsson, P., Newburn-Cook, C. V., & Wallin, L. (2011) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-83 · Cited by 101
Diner, B. M., Carpenter, C. R., O'Connell, T., Pang, P., Brown, M. D., Seupaul, R. A., Celentano, J. J., Mayer, D., & Members, K.-C. T. I. (2007) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2007.tb02381.x · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Shaneyfelt, T., Baum, K. D., Bell, D., Feldstein, D., Houston, T. K., Kaatz, S., Whelan, C., & Green, M.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2006-09-06
- Volume
- 296
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1116
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2074662324
- Cited by
- 427
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 43.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Instruments for Evaluating Education in Evidence-Based Practice: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.296.9.1116
- The paper
- Shaneyfelt, T., Baum, K. D., Bell, D., Feldstein, D., Houston, T. K., Kaatz, S., Whelan, C., & Green, M. (2006). Instruments for Evaluating Education in Evidence-Based Practice: A Systematic Review. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.9.1116
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.