Search bioRxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2021.08.25.457703

Instruments to assess Evidence-Based Practice among healthcare professionals: a systematic review

Martins da Silva, A.·Valentim, D. P.·Martins, A. L.·Padula, R. S.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The study makes it possible to select the most appropriate instruments to evaluate the use of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) among health professionals. The objective of this study was to assess the measurement properties, summarize and describe the instruments that evaluate the use of EBP in health professionals, currently available through the update of the systematic review. The study was conducted and reported according to recommendations of the PRISMA checklist. A systematic search was conducted in the databases: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and ERIC. In addition, three groups of search terms: EBP terms; evaluation; cross-cultural adaptation and measurement proprieties. They included studies that showed assessment tools of EBP in healthcare workers in general publication of full-text scientific articles, which tested the measurement properties and publication of an article in English. Searches included published studies from 2006 until July 2020. Evaluation of the methodological quality of the studies was conducted according to the COSMIN initiative. 92 studies were included. Forty new instruments have been identified to assess EBP. From these, most were developed for nursing professionals and physiotherapists. More than 48% of studies have American and Australian English as their native language. Only 28% of the studies included students in the samples. Reliability was considered appropriate (sufficient) in 76% of the instruments. The COSMIN checklist classified 7 (seven) instruments as being suitable for use in the target audience. However, Fresno Test remains the most appropriate instrument for assessing the use of EBP in healthcare professionals. 40 new instruments that assess EBP have been identified. Most are consistent and reliable for measuring the use of EBP in healthcare professionals. The Fresno Test, in a list of seven reliable and valid instruments for analysis, remains the most used and the one that most assesses the domains of EBP.

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and educationPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Martins da Silva, A., Valentim, D. P., Martins, A. L., Padula, R. S.. 2021-08-25. Instruments to assess Evidence-Based Practice among healthcare professionals: a systematic review. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.25.457703

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2022

Welfare concerns for mounted load carrying by working donkeys in Pakistan

Working donkeys (Equus asinus) are vital to peoples livelihoods. They are essential for carrying goods, however globally, overloading is one of the primary welfare concerns of working donkeys. We studied mounted load carrying by donkeys and associated factors in Pakistan. A cross-sectional study of donkey owners (n = 332) was conducted, and interviews were undertaken based on a questionnaire. Owners estimated that the median weight of their donkeys was 110kg (interquartile range (IQR) 100-120kg), and that they carried a median mounted load of 81.5kg (IQR 63-99kg). We found that 87.4% of donkeys carried a load above 50% of their bodyweight ratio (BWR), the median BWR carried was 77.1% (IQR 54.5-90.7%), and 25.3% of donkeys carried above 90% BWR. Donkeys that were loaded at more than 50% BWR were more likely to sit, compared to donkeys loaded with less weight (p=0.01). Donkeys working in peri-urban and urban areas were more likely to carry a greater BWR than donkeys working in rural areas (P<0.001), as were those carrying construction materials or bricks, compared to agricultural materials (p=0.004). Age (p=0.03) and breed (p=0.01) were also associated with carrying a higher weight. Overloading based on current recommendations (50% BWR) was common, with the majority (87.4%) of donkeys reported to carry more than the recommended 50% limit. This survey provides evidence of on-the-ground working practices and factors associated with mounted load carrying, which is critical for developing evidence-based recommendations for loading, in order to improve the welfare of working donkeys.

scientific communication and education↗