What Are the Effects of Teaching Evidence-Based Health Care (EBHC)? Overview of Systematic Reviews

被引:166
作者
Young, Taryn [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Rohwer, Anke [1 ]
Volmink, Jimmy [1 ,2 ]
Clarke, Mike [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Stellenbosch, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Ctr Evidence Based Hlth Care, Cape Town, South Africa
[2] South African Med Res Council, South African Cochrane Ctr, Cape Town, South Africa
[3] Univ Stellenbosch, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Cape Town, South Africa
[4] Queens Univ Belfast, All Ireland Hub Trials Methodol Res, Belfast, Antrim, North Ireland
来源
PLOS ONE | 2014年 / 9卷 / 01期
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会; 英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; CRITICAL-APPRAISAL; JOURNAL CLUBS; EDUCATION; UNDERGRADUATE; SKILLS;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0086706
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background: An evidence-based approach to health care is recognized internationally as a key competency for healthcare practitioners. This overview systematically evaluated and organized evidence from systematic reviews on teaching evidence-based health care (EBHC). Methods/Findings: We searched for systematic reviews evaluating interventions for teaching EBHC to health professionals compared to no intervention or different strategies. Outcomes covered EBHC knowledge, skills, attitudes, practices and health outcomes. Comprehensive searches were conducted in April 2013. Two reviewers independently selected eligible reviews, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality. We included 16 systematic reviews, published between 1993 and 2013. There was considerable overlap across reviews. We found that 171 source studies included in the reviews related to 81 separate studies, of which 37 are in more than one review. Studies used various methodologies to evaluate educational interventions of varying content, format and duration in undergraduates, interns, residents and practicing health professionals. The evidence in the reviews showed that multifaceted, clinically integrated interventions, with assessment, led to improvements in knowledge, skills and attitudes. Interventions improved critical appraisal skills and integration of results into decisions, and improved knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviour amongst practicing health professionals. Considering single interventions, EBHC knowledge and attitude were similar for lecture-based versus online teaching. Journal clubs appeared to increase clinical epidemiology and biostatistics knowledge and reading behavior, but not appraisal skills. EBHC courses improved appraisal skills and knowledge. Amongst practicing health professionals, interactive online courses with guided critical appraisal showed significant increase in knowledge and appraisal skills. A short workshop using problem-based approaches, compared to no intervention, increased knowledge but not appraisal skills. Conclusions: EBHC teaching and learning strategies should focus on implementing multifaceted, clinically integrated approaches with assessment. Future rigorous research should evaluate minimum components for multifaceted interventions, assessment of medium to long-term outcomes, and implementation of these interventions.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 55 条
  • [41] Overviews of reviews often have limited rigor: a systematic review
    Pieper, Dawid
    Buechter, Roland
    Jerinic, Petra
    Eikermann, Michaela
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2012, 65 (12) : 1267 - 1273
  • [42] Ray A., 2013, IS TEACHING LIT SEAR
  • [43] Challenges in systematic reviews of educational intervention studies
    Reed, D
    Price, EG
    Windish, DM
    Wright, SM
    Gozu, A
    Hsu, EB
    Beach, MC
    Kern, D
    Bass, EB
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2005, 142 (12) : 1080 - 1089
  • [44] Effective or just practical? An evaluation of an online postgraduate module on evidence-based medicine (EBM)
    Rohwer, Anke
    Young, Taryn
    van Schalkwyk, Susan
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2013, 13
  • [45] Clinical epidemiology: what, who, and whither
    Sackett, DL
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2002, 55 (12) : 1161 - 1166
  • [46] Instruments for evaluating education in evidence-based practice - A systematic review
    Shaneyfelt, Terrence
    Baum, Karyn D.
    Bell, Douglas
    Feldstein, David
    Houston, Thomas K.
    Kaatz, Scott
    Whelan, Chad
    Green, Michael
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2006, 296 (09): : 1116 - 1127
  • [47] Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews
    Shea, Beverley J.
    Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
    Wells, George A.
    Boers, Maarten
    Andersson, Neil
    Hamel, Candyce
    Porter, Ashley C.
    Tugwell, Peter
    Moher, David
    Bouter, Lex M.
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2007, 7 (1)
  • [48] Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part I: why and for whom?
    Silva, Valter
    Grande, Antonio Jose
    Cabrera Martimbianco, Ana Luiza
    Riera, Rachel
    Viegas Carvalho, Alan Pedrosa
    [J]. SAO PAULO MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2012, 130 (06): : 398 - 404
  • [49] Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions
    Smith, Valerie
    Devane, Declan
    Begley, Cecily M.
    Clarke, Mike
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2011, 11
  • [50] Straus SE, 2000, CAN MED ASSOC J, V163, P837