Investigating behavior, attitudes, knowledge, awareness and barriers to the implementation of evidence-based practice by physiotherapists in Egypt: A cross sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few studies exist regarding the attitudes and behaviours of Egyptian physiotherapists in relation to the use of evidence in practice (EBP). The purpose of this study was to describe the beliefs, attitudes, knowledge, and behaviours of Egyptian physical therapists as they relate to evidence-based practice. It also explores their perception of possible barriers to implement EBP. Four hundred and seventy Egyptian therapists responded to our questionnaire with results revealing participants' awareness towards EBP was quite diverse. Only terms of systematic review and randomized controlled trial were well understood while remaining terms showed various level of comprehension which were rather low. Results also revealed significant correlations between attitudes towards EBP and overall awareness as well as attitudes and knowledge (r = 0.270 and 0.107) respectively. In addition, a significant relationship was also found between EBP awareness and knowledge with (r = 0.219). With regards to the barriers, insufficient teaching in previous education was identified as the primary barrier (34.4 %), followed by lack of funding and resources (31.1 %), while lack of time (10.2 %) was reported as the least. These barriers highlight the need to enhance implementation of EBP within Egyptian Physiotherapists. Findings of this study can be used as a foundation for the implementation of EBP in various clinical settings by understanding the limitations and barriers reported. Our study concluded that despite Egyptian physiotherapists declare their awareness of EBP, nevertheless, knowledge is restricted to a small number of terms. More focus is required to enhance the knowledge and practice of EBP. Focusing on adjustable factors, including increasing the awareness of value of research would help reduce time and resource demands for physiotherapists when implementing EBP.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".