OBJECTIVE: The principles of evidence-based practice (EBP) are a mandated component of the pediatric residency curriculum; however, a pediatrics-based assessment tool validated with pediatric residents does not exist. METHODS: We designed an assessment instrument composed of items in 4 categories: 1) demographics; 2) comfort level; 3) self-reported practice of EBP; and 4) EBP knowledge. This last section required participants to identify best evidence and most appropriate study design by using pediatric-based scenarios, develop searchable questions, and use existing published research to address diagnostic and treatment issues. Four groups completed the instrument: preclinical medical students (MS-2), incoming pediatric interns (PGY-1), incoming second- and third-year pediatric residents (PGY2-3), and expert tutors (expert). We determined internal consistency, interrater reliability, content validity, item difficulty, and construct validity. RESULTS: Fifty-six subjects completed tests (MS-2, n = 13; PGY-1, n = 13; PGY2-3, n = 22; expert, n = 8). Internal reliability was good, with Cronbach's alpha = .80. Interrater reliability was high (kappa = 0.94). Items were free of floor or ceiling effects. Comfort level and self-reported practice of EBP increased with expertise level and prior EBP experience (P < .01). Scores on the knowledge section (out of 50 +/- SD) rose with training level (MS-2: 14.8 +/- 5.7; PGY-1: 22.2 +/- 3.4; PGY2-3: 31.7 +/- 6.1; experts: 43 +/- 4.0; P < .01). Scores also correlated with prior EBP education. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a reliable and valid instrument to assess knowledge and skill in EBP taught to pediatric residents. This instrument can aid pediatric educators in monitoring the impact of the EBP curriculum. 2010 Academic Pediatric Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: The principles of evidence-based practice (EBP) are a mandated component of the pediatric residency curriculum; however, a pediatrics-based assessment tool validated with pediatric residents does not exist. METHODS: We designed an assessment instrument composed of items in 4 categories: 1) demographics; 2) comfort level; 3) self-reported practice of EBP; and 4) EBP knowledge. This last section required participants to identify best evidence and most appropriate study design by using pediatric-based scenarios, develop searchable questions, and use existing published research to address diagnostic and treatment issues. Four groups completed the instrument: preclinical medical students (MS-2), incoming pediatric interns (PGY-1), incoming second- and third-year pediatric residents (PGY2-3), and expert tutors (expert). We determined internal consistency, interrater reliability, content validity, item difficulty, and construct validity. RESULTS: Fifty-six subjects completed tests (MS-2, n = 13; PGY-1, n = 13; PGY2-3, n = 22; expert, n = 8). Internal reliability was good, with Cronbach's alpha = .80. Interrater reliability was high (kappa = 0.94). Items were free of floor or ceiling effects. Comfort level and self-reported practice of EBP increased with expertise level and prior EBP experience (P < .01). Scores on the knowledge section (out of 50 +/- SD) rose with training level (MS-2: 14.8 +/- 5.7; PGY-1: 22.2 +/- 3.4; PGY2-3: 31.7 +/- 6.1; experts: 43 +/- 4.0; P < .01). Scores also correlated with prior EBP education. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a reliable and valid instrument to assess knowledge and skill in EBP taught to pediatric residents. This instrument can aid pediatric educators in monitoring the impact of the EBP curriculum. 2010 Academic Pediatric Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Mira T Keddis; Thomas J Beckman; Michael W Cullen; Darcy A Reed; Andrew J Halvorsen; Christopher M Wittich; Colin P West; Furman S McDonald Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2011-12