Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 911

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sicily statement on evidence-based practice

Open access
Dawes, Martin, Summerskill, William, Glasziou, Paul, Cartabellotta, Antonino, Martin, Janet, Hopayian, Kevork, Porzsolt, Franz, Burls, Amanda, Osborne, James·2005·BMC Medical Education

Abstract

Background: A variety of definitions of evidence-based practice (EBP) exist. However, definitions are in themselves insufficient to explain the underlying processes of EBP and to differentiate between an evidence-based process and evidence-based outcome. There is a need for a clear statement of what Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) means, a description of the skills required to practise in an evidence-based manner and a curriculum that outlines the minimum requirements for training health professionals in EBP. This consensus statement is based on current literature and incorporating the experience of delegates attending the 2003 Conference of Evidence-Based Health Care Teachers and Developers ("Signposting the future of EBHC"). Discussion: Evidence-Based Practice has evolved in both scope and definition. Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) requires that decisions about health care are based on the best available, current, valid and relevant evidence. These decisions should be made by those receiving care, informed by the tacit and explicit knowledge of those providing care, within the context of available resources. Health care professionals must be able to gain, assess, apply and integrate new knowledge and have the ability to adapt to changing circumstances throughout their professional life. Curricula to deliver these aptitudes need to be grounded in the five-step model of EBP, and informed by ongoing research. Core assessment tools for each of the steps should continue to be developed, validated, and made freely available. Summary: All health care professionals need to understand the principles of EBP, recognise EBP in action, implement evidence-based policies, and have a critical attitude to their own practice and to evidence. Without these skills, professionals and organisations will find it difficult to provide 'best practice'.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1472-6920-5-1

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 47 references

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Goethe JW: "Denken und Tun". Maximen und Reflexionen. 1833
  2. Culham E: Evidence based practice and professional credibility (editorial). Physiotherapy Theory and Practice. 1998, 14: 65-67. · doi:10.3109/09593989809057148
  3. Richards D, Lawrence A, Sackett DL: Bringing an evidence-base to dentistry. Community Dent Health. 1997, 14: 63-65.
  4. Geddes JR: On the need for evidence-based psychiatry. Evidence-Based Medicine. 1996, 1: 199-200.
  5. CSP: Standards of Physiotherapy Practice. Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. 2000
  6. Humphreys BL, McCutcheon DE: Growth patterns in the National Library of Medicine's serials collection and in Index Medicus journals, 1966-1985. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1994, 82: 18-24.
  7. Wilson MP DCDKDF: Extramural programs of theNational Library of Medicine: program objectives and present status. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1966, 54: 293-310.
  8. Delamothe T, Smith R: The BMJ's website scales up. BMJ. 1998, 316: 1109-1110. · doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7138.1109
  9. Hojat M, Nasca TJ, J E, Frsiby A, Veloski J, Gonnella J: An operational measure of physician lifelong learning:its development, components and preliminary psychometric data. Med Teach. 2003, 25: 433-437. · doi:10.1080/0142159031000137463
  10. Guyatt G: Evidence-Based Medicine. ACP J Club. 1991, A-16: 114.
  11. Epling J, Smueny J, Patil A, Tudiver F: Teaching evidence-based medicine skills through a residency developed guideline. Family Medicine. 2002, 34: 646-648.
  12. Reece I, Walker S: Teaching and training in Learning. 2002, Sunderland, Business Education Publishers, Ltd.,, 4th
  13. Dobbie AE, Schneider FD, Anderson AD, Littlefield J: What evidence supports teaching evidence-based medicine?. Acad Med. 2000, 75: 1184-1185. · doi:10.1097/00001888-200012000-00010
  14. BEME G: Best evidence medical education(BEME): report of meeting 3-5 December 1999, London, UK. Medical Teacher. 2000, 22: 242-245. 10.1080/01421590050006197. · doi:10.1080/01421590050006197
  15. Fliegel JE, Frohna JG, Mangrulkar RS: A computer-based OSCE station to measure competence in evidence-based medicine skills in medical students. Acad Med. 2002, 77: 1157-1158. · doi:10.1097/00001888-200211000-00022

Cited by

See all 911

Metadata

Authors
Dawes, M., Summerskill, W., Glasziou, P., Cartabellotta, A., Martin, J., Hopayian, K., Porzsolt, F., Burls, A., & Osborne, J.
Venue
BMC Medical Education
Published
2005-01-05
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
1-1
ISSN
1472-6920 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1852330046
Cited by
911
References
47
FWCI
38.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold
Licence

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: Sicily statement on evidence-based practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1472-6920-5-1
The paper
Dawes, M., Summerskill, W., Glasziou, P., Cartabellotta, A., Martin, J., Hopayian, K., Porzsolt, F., Burls, A., & Osborne, J. (2005). Sicily statement on evidence-based practice. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-5-1

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.