MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392877646 · doi:10.1016/j.ijosm.2024.100721

A national cross-sectional survey of the attitudes, skills and use of evidence-based practice amongst Canadian osteopaths

2024· article· en· W4392877646 on OpenAlexaffabout
René Pelletier, Chantal Morin, Monica Noy, Oliver P. Thomson, Tobias Sundberg, Matthew Leach

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of osteopathic medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCross-sectional studyFamily medicineOsteopathyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Health care professions face increasing pressure to integrate research evidence into practice to improve patient outcomes. For many professions, the uptake of evidence-based practice (EBP) remains poorly understood, including for osteopaths in Canada. The primary aim of this study was to determine the perceptions, training, self perceived skills, use, barriers, and facilitators of EBP amongst Canadian osteopaths. Methods Canadian Osteopaths were invited to participate in an online survey using the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude and Utilisation Survey. Results Four hundred and eight osteopaths' (response rate 13.4%) provided informed consent of which three hundred and forty answered all questions. The majority of respondents had a favorable perception and believed EBP was important (70.8%). Most respondents (>65%) rated their skills in performing EBP at a medium-high level. EBP use was infrequent among respondents. Barriers to the utilisation of EBP were lack of clinical evidence, time, and relevance to osteopathic practice. Facilitators of EBP use included having greater access to research articles and tools, and further information regarding critical analysis of research. Although searching and consulting research information was rarely performed by respondents, they were perceived as the most important aspect of clinical decision making along with clinical practice guidelines, personal and patient preferences. Conclusion Canadian osteopathic manual practitioners were largely supportive of EBP but there was limited commitment to its integration within clinical practice. Improving knowledge and skills of EBP, addressing the barriers of EBP uptake, and integrating EBP into educational programs may improve the uptake of EBP within osteopathic practice. Implications for practice There is acknowledgement of the importance and benefits of evidence-based practice amongst Canadian osteopaths. Although Canadian osteopaths recognize the importance of evidence-based practice there is limited commitment to its use within clinical practice. The major barriers to the use of evidence-based practice are a lack of time and clinically relevant osteopathic literature. Canadian osteopaths state that patient preference, clinical practice guidelines, published clinical evidence and personal preference where the most important sources of information used for the basis of clinical decision making. Interventions that aim to improve knowledge and skills, addresses barriers, and fosters alignment between osteopathic models and evidence-based practices may help to improve the uptake among osteopaths in Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.321
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of osteopathic medicineSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207