RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: One of the main barriers against the implementation of evidence-based medicine (EBM) is the lack of search skills, an element that affects the finding of the best available evidence. Faculty staff should be capable of using the best evidence in practice and of teaching students to implement EBM elements. They should be familiar with search strategies and evidence databases. The aim of this study is to compare the application of evidence databases by faculties and by residents with no training in this field. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-seven faculties and first-year residents of the Tabriz University of Medical Sciences filled out a valid self-administered questionnaire on information-seeking behaviour from August 2008 to June 2010. A chi-square test was used to compare the variables. RESULTS: There were 52.1% of the respondents who were faculty members and 47.9% were residents. Only 8.7% used the Internet for their practice mostly. While Google was the most used resource, TRIP and Cochrane were less used. Significantly, the faculties used these resources more than the residents in both cases. Furthermore, two-thirds of the participants were unfamiliar with medical subject headings (MeSH), and only 14.5% consulted a clinical librarian for help. CONCLUSION: Significantly, clinicians used evidence databases and online resources minimally for their practice. Additionally, as the faculties used EBM resources more than the residents, this programme should be considered for inclusion in the curricula of medical schools.
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: One of the main barriers against the implementation of evidence-based medicine (EBM) is the lack of search skills, an element that affects the finding of the best available evidence. Faculty staff should be capable of using the best evidence in practice and of teaching students to implement EBM elements. They should be familiar with search strategies and evidence databases. The aim of this study is to compare the application of evidence databases by faculties and by residents with no training in this field. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-seven faculties and first-year residents of the Tabriz University of Medical Sciences filled out a valid self-administered questionnaire on information-seeking behaviour from August 2008 to June 2010. A chi-square test was used to compare the variables. RESULTS: There were 52.1% of the respondents who were faculty members and 47.9% were residents. Only 8.7% used the Internet for their practice mostly. While Google was the most used resource, TRIP and Cochrane were less used. Significantly, the faculties used these resources more than the residents in both cases. Furthermore, two-thirds of the participants were unfamiliar with medical subject headings (MeSH), and only 14.5% consulted a clinical librarian for help. CONCLUSION: Significantly, clinicians used evidence databases and online resources minimally for their practice. Additionally, as the faculties used EBM resources more than the residents, this programme should be considered for inclusion in the curricula of medical schools.