Sicily statement on classification and development of evidence-based practice learning assessment tools

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

Teaching the steps of evidence-based practice (EBP) has become standard curriculum for health professions at both student and professional levels. Determining the best methods for evaluating EBP learning is hampered by a dearth of valid and practical assessment tools and by the absence of guidelines for classifying the purpose of those that exist. Conceived and developed by delegates of the Fifth International Conference of Evidence-Based Health Care Teachers and Developers, the aim of this statement is to provide guidance for purposeful classification and development of tools to assess EBP learning.

Discussion

This paper identifies key principles for designing EBP learning assessment tools, recommends a common taxonomy for new and existing tools, and presents the Classification Rubric for EBP Assessment Tools in Education (CREATE) framework for classifying such tools. Recommendations are provided for developers of EBP learning assessments and priorities are suggested for the types of assessments that are needed. Examples place existing EBP assessments into the CREATE framework to demonstrate how a common taxonomy might facilitate purposeful development and use of EBP learning assessment tools.

Summary

The widespread adoption of EBP into professional education requires valid and reliable measures of learning. Limited tools exist with established psychometrics. This international consensus statement strives to provide direction for developers of new EBP learning assessment tools and a framework for classifying the purposes of such tools .

Related collections

Most cited references 24

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach.

S Michie, M. Johnston, C. Abraham … (2005)

Evidence-based guidelines are often not implemented effectively with the result that best health outcomes are not achieved. This may be due to a lack of theoretical understanding of the processes involved in changing the behaviour of healthcare professionals. This paper reports the development of a consensus on a theoretical framework that could be used in implementation research. The objectives were to identify an agreed set of key theoretical constructs for use in (1) studying the implementation of evidence based practice and (2) developing strategies for effective implementation, and to communicate these constructs to an interdisciplinary audience. Six phases of work were conducted to develop a consensus: (1) identifying theoretical constructs; (2) simplifying into construct domains; (3) evaluating the importance of the construct domains; (4) interdisciplinary evaluation; (5) validating the domain list; and (6) piloting interview questions. The contributors were a "psychological theory" group (n = 18), a "health services research" group (n = 13), and a "health psychology" group (n = 30). Twelve domains were identified to explain behaviour change: (1) knowledge, (2) skills, (3) social/professional role and identity, (4) beliefs about capabilities, (5) beliefs about consequences, (6) motivation and goals, (7) memory, attention and decision processes, (8) environmental context and resources, (9) social influences, (10) emotion regulation, (11) behavioural regulation, and (12) nature of the behaviour. A set of behaviour change domains agreed by a consensus of experts is available for use in implementation research. Applications of this domain list will enhance understanding of the behaviour change processes inherent in implementation of evidence-based practice and will also test the validity of these proposed domains.

0 comments Cited 590 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Mental health provider attitudes toward adoption of evidence-based practice: the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS).

Gregory A. Aarons (2004)

Mental health provider attitudes toward organizational change have not been well studied. Dissemination and implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) into real-world settings represent organizational change that may be limited or facilitated by provider attitudes toward adoption of new treatments, interventions, and practices. A brief measure of mental health provider attitudes toward adoption of EBPs was developed and attitudes were examined in relation to a set of provider individual difference and organizational characteristics. Participants were 322 public sector clinical service workers from 51 programs providing mental health services to children and adolescents and their families. Four dimensions of attitudes toward adoption of EBPs were identified: (1) intuitive Appeal of EBP, (2) likelihood of adopting EBP given Requirements to do so, (3) Openness to new practices, and (4) perceived Divergence of usual practice with research-based/academically developed interventions. Provider attitudes varied by education level, level of experience, and organizational context. Attitudes toward adoption of EBPs can be reliably measured and vary in relation to individual differences and service context. EBP implementation plans should include consideration of mental health service provider attitudes as a potential aid to improve the process and effectiveness of dissemination efforts.

0 comments Cited 294 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies.

Geraint E R Thomas, Gavin C. Donaldson, G MacLennan … (2004)

To undertake a systematic review of the effectiveness and costs of different guideline development, dissemination and implementation strategies. To estimate the resource implications of these strategies. To develop a framework for deciding when it is efficient to develop and introduce clinical guidelines. MEDLINE, Healthstar, Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, EMBASE, SIGLE and the specialised register of the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group. Single estimates of dichotomous process variables were derived for each study comparison based upon the primary end-point or the median measure across several reported end-points. Separate analyses were undertaken for comparisons of different types of intervention. The study also explored whether the effects of multifaceted interventions increased with the number of intervention components. Studies reporting economic data were also critically appraised. A survey to estimate the feasibility and likely resource requirements of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies in UK settings was carried out with key informants from primary and secondary care. In total, 235 studies reporting 309 comparisons met the inclusion criteria; of these 73% of comparisons evaluated multifaceted interventions, although the maximum number of replications of a specific multifaceted intervention was 11 comparisons. Overall, the majority of comparisons reporting dichotomous process data observed improvements in care; however, there was considerable variation in the observed effects both within and across interventions. Commonly evaluated single interventions were reminders, dissemination of educational materials, and audit and feedback. There were 23 comparisons of multifaceted interventions involving educational outreach. The majority of interventions observed modest to moderate improvements in care. No relationship was found between the number of component interventions and the effects of multifaceted interventions. Only 29.4% of comparisons reported any economic data. The majority of studies only reported costs of treatment; only 25 studies reported data on the costs of guideline development or guideline dissemination and implementation. The majority of studies used process measures for their primary end-point, despite the fact that only three guidelines were explicitly evidence based (and may not have been efficient). Respondents to the key informant survey rarely identified existing budgets to support guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. In general, the respondents thought that only dissemination of educational materials and short (lunchtime) educational meetings were generally feasible within current resources. There is an imperfect evidence base to support decisions about which guideline dissemination and implementation strategies are likely to be efficient under different circumstances. Decision makers need to use considerable judgement about how best to use the limited resources they have for clinical governance and related activities to maximise population benefits. They need to consider the potential clinical areas for clinical effectiveness activities, the likely benefits and costs required to introduce guidelines and the likely benefits and costs as a result of any changes in provider behaviour. Further research is required to: develop and validate a coherent theoretical framework of health professional and organisational behaviour and behaviour change to inform better the choice of interventions in research and service settings, and to estimate the efficiency of dissemination and implementation strategies in the presence of different barriers and effect modifiers.

0 comments Cited 211 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Med Educ

Title: BMC Medical Education

Publisher: BioMed Central

ISSN (Electronic): 1472-6920

Publication date Collection: 2011

Publication date (Electronic): 5 October 2011

Volume: 11

Page: 78

Affiliations

[1 ]Division of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

[2 ]Doctoral Programs in Physical Therapy, Dept. of Rehabilitation and Movement Sciences, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark, NJ, USA

[3 ]School of Health & Related Research, University of Sheffield, UK

[4 ]National Prescribing Centre, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, Liverpool, UK

[5 ]Department of Epidemiology & Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine, Monash University, VIC, Australia

[6 ]Center for Evidence-Based Dentistry, The Forsyth Institute, Boston, MA, USA

[7 ]Palacky University Medical Library, Olomouc, Czech Republic

[8 ]Department of General Practice/Family Medicine, Academic Medical Center-University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Article

Publisher ID: 1472-6920-11-78

DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-11-78

PMC ID: 3221624

PubMed ID: 21970731

SO-VID: f0e3573f-c68b-460e-b8eb-e7740f52c194

License:

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Sicily statement on classification and development of evidence-based practice learning assessment tools

Read this article at

Abstract

Background

Discussion

Summary

Related collections

Metrics and Research Assessment

Most cited references 24

Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach.

Mental health provider attitudes toward adoption of evidence-based practice: the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS).

Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies.

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 168

Cited by 79

Most referenced authors 412