Does a one-day workshop improve clinical faculty’s comfort and behaviour in practising and teaching evidence-based medicine? A Canadian mixed methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of a 1-day evidence-based medicine (EBM) workshop on physician attitudes and behaviours around teaching and practicing EBM. DESIGN: A mixed methods study using a before/after cohort. SETTING: A medical school delivering continuing professional development to 1250 clinical faculty over a large geographic area in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 105 physician clinical faculty members. INTERVENTION: A 1-day workshop presented at 11 different sites over an 18-month period focusing on EBM skills for teaching and clinical practice. OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) A quantitative survey administered immediately before and after the workshop, and 3-6 months later, to assess the hypothesis that comfort with teaching and practising EBM can be improved.(2) A qualitative survey of the expectations for, and impact of the workshop on, participant behaviours and attitudes using a combination of pre, post and 3 to 6-month follow-up questionnaires, and telephone interviews completed 10-14 months after the workshop. RESULTS: Physician comfort with their EBM clinical skills improved on average by 0.93 points on a 5-point Likert scale, and comfort with EBM teaching skills by 0.97 points (p values 0.001). Most of this improvement was sustained 3-6 months later. Three to fourteen months after the workshop, half of responding participants reported that they were using the Population Intervention Comparator Outcome (PICO) methodology of question framing for teaching, clinical practice or both. CONCLUSIONS: Comfort in teaching and practicing EBM can be improved by a 1-day workshop, with most of this improvement sustained 3-6 months later. PICO question framing can be learnt at a 1-day workshop, and is associated with a self-reported change in clinical and teaching practice 3-14 months later. This represents both level 2 (attitudes) and level 3 (behaviours) change using the Kirkpatrick model of evaluation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".