Evidence-Based Practice Attitudes, Skills, and Usage Among Canadian Naturopathic Doctors: A Summary of the Evidence and Directions for the Future
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a framework aimed at facilitating the delivery of best practice care. Despite documented benefits, many health professionals have expressed concerns about EBP. Naturopathic medicine has been cited as being in opposition to EBP; however, this is not supported by the evidence. In a recent cross-sectional Canadian survey of naturopathic doctors, respondents self-reported a moderate to high use of EBP and use of a range of sources of evidence to guide clinical decisions. Evidence-based practice skill was reported to be moderately high, and attitudes were predominantly positive. These findings are consistent with other research undertaken on the topic which has identified a shift towards embracing EBP. Canadian naturopathic doctors have indicated a high level of interest in improving their EBP skills, and we present an upcoming opportunity for skill development.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it