Interventions, methods and outcome measures used in teaching evidence-based practice to healthcare students: an overview of systematic reviews

Ref ID 1048
First Author L.D. Nielsen
Journal BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION
Year Of Publishing 2024
URL https://bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12909-024-05259-8
Keywords • General medical
• Low methodological quality
• Education
Problem(s) • No registered or published protocol
• Interpreted without considering certainty or overall quality of the evidence base
• Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed
• Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
• Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country Denmark
Checklists • AMSTAR 2
• JBI
Aim To assess the methodological quality using AMSTAR 2 and current evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) on educational interventions being used by educators to teach evidence-based practice to professional bachelor-degree healthcare students indexed across PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, ERIC and the Cochrane library) from May 2013 to January 25th, 2024.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings All the 6 included systematic reviews on educational interventions being used by educators to teach evidence-based practice to professional bachelor-degree healthcare students indexed across PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, ERIC and the Cochrane library) from May 2013 to January 25th, 2024, were of critically low methodological quality using AMSTAR 2. The main reasons for the low quality of the reviews were 1) not demonstrating a registered protocol prior to the review (4/6, 66.6%), 2) not providing a list of excluded studies with justification for exclusion (5/6, 83.3%) and 3) not accounting for the quality of the individual studies when interpreting the result of the review (14/6, 66.6%). Half of the SRs did not report sources of funding for primary studies.
Number of systematic reviews included 6
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 651
Treatment impacted Not Applicable
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description