The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Evidence‐Based Practice Beliefs and Implementation Scales: Psychometric Properties of Two New Instruments
Abstract
Background: Implementation of evidence‐based practice (EBP) by health professionals is a key strategy for improving health care quality and patient outcomes as well as increasing professional role satisfaction. However, it is estimated that only a small percentage of nurses and other health care providers are consistently using this approach to clinical practice. Aim: The aim of this study was to report on the development and psychometric properties of two new scales: (1) the 16‐item EBP Beliefs Scale that allows measurement of a person's beliefs about the value of EBP and the ability to implement it, and (2) the 18‐item EBP Implementation Scale that allows measurement of the extent to which EBP is implemented. Methods: Nurses ( N = 394) attending continuing education workshops volunteered to complete the scales. Data were analysed to evaluate reliability and validity of both instruments. Results : Cronbach's alpha was > .90 for each scale. Principal components analysis indicated that each scale allowed measurement of a unidimensional construct. Strength of EBP beliefs and the extent of EBP implementation increased as educational level increased ( p < .001) and as responsibility in the workplace increased ( p < .001). Conclusion: In this study, initial evidence was provided to support the reliability and validity of the EBP Beliefs and Implementation Scales in a heterogeneous sample of practicing nurses. Evidence to Action: Use of the scales in future research could generate evidence to guide EBP implementation strategies in practice and education. Results could establish the extent to which EBP is being implemented and its effect on clinician satisfaction and patient outcomes.
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 Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change.
Prochaska, J. O., & Velicer, W. F. (1997) · American Journal of Health Promotion · doi:10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.38 · Cited by 7,782
On the Self-Regulation of Behavior
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139174794 · Cited by 4,110
Scale Development Research: A Content Analysis and Recommendations for Best Practices
Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006) · The Counseling Psychologist · doi:10.1177/0011000006288127 · Cited by 4,087
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1982) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.92.1.111 · Cited by 2,650
Eccles, M., Grimshaw, J., Walker, A., Johnston, M., & Pitts, N. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.09.002 · Cited by 917 · cited 1×
“However, the uptake by health care professionals of research findings into practice and implementation of EBP has been slow and inconsistent because of multiple intra-personal and environmental barriers (Eccles et al. 2005; Fineout-Overholt et al. 2005; Parahoo 2000).”
BackgroundMelnyk, B. M., Feinstein, N. F., Alpert-Gillis, L., Fairbanks, E., Crean, H. F., Sinkin, R. A., Stone, P. W., Small, L., Tu, X., & Gross, S. J. (2006) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2005-2580 · Cited by 623
Self-citation
Cited by
Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks
Nilsen, P. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0242-0 · Cited by 4,447
Chaudoir, S. R., Dugan, A. G., & Barr, C. H. (2013) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-22 · Cited by 800
Melnyk, B. M., Gallagher‐Ford, L., Long, L. E., & Fineout‐Overholt, E. (2014) · Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing · doi:10.1111/wvn.12021 · Cited by 605
Self-citationMelnyk, B. M., Fineout-Overholt, E., Gallagher-Ford, L., & Kaplan, L. (2012) · JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration · doi:10.1097/nna.0b013e3182664e0a · Cited by 499
Self-citationMelnyk, B. M., Gallagher‐Ford, L., Zellefrow, C., Tucker, S., Thomas, B., Sinnott, L. T., & Tan, A. (2018) · Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing · doi:10.1111/wvn.12269 · Cited by 388
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Melnyk, B. M., Fineout‐Overholt, E., & Mays, M. Z.
- Venue
- Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-12
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 208-216
- ISSN
- 1545-102X (ISSN-L)
- 1741-6787
- OpenAlex
- W2028904083
- Cited by
- 378
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 16.73
- 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: The Evidence‐Based Practice Beliefs and Implementation Scales: Psychometric Properties of Two New Instruments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1741-6787.2008.00126.x
- The paper
- Melnyk, B. M., Fineout‐Overholt, E., & Mays, M. Z. (2008). The Evidence‐Based Practice Beliefs and Implementation Scales: Psychometric Properties of Two New Instruments. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6787.2008.00126.x
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.
