Evaluation of an evidence-based practice continuing education course for Canadian Naturopathic Doctors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice (EBP) combines the best available evidence with clinician expertise and patient preference to improve patient outcomes. Recent evidence indicates that Canadian Naturopathic Doctors (NDs) are interested in EBP skill development. The primary objective of the present study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a co-designed EBP Continuing Education (CE) course for Canadian NDs. Secondary objectives included assessing changes in EBP skill, use, attitudes, and knowledge. METHODS: The CE course was evaluated using a pre-post design involving licensed Canadian NDs. The CE course consisted of five weekly, one-hour sessions that were delivered virtually. On course completion, participants reported on their level of satisfaction and provided suggestions for improvement. EBP skill, attitudes and use were assessed using the validated Evidence-Based Practice Attitudes and Utilization Survey. EBP knowledge was objectively assessed using a quiz. Changes in EBP skill, attitudes, use and knowledge were compared between baseline and the end of the course. Use of evidence was reassessed at a 2-month follow up. RESULTS: Sixty-one NDs met eligibility criteria. Eighty-nine percent of participants agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with the course. There was a significant increase in self-reported skill and objectively measured EBP knowledge, but no substantive change in EBP attitudes or use of evidence over time. Some participants indicated the level of difficulty was too high while others reported that it could have been more difficult. Participants also wanted more opportunities to practice the skills being taught in the course. CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of the co-designed EBP CE course was found to be both feasible and acceptable. Preliminary evidence suggests that participation in the course was associated with improvements in EBP knowledge and skill. Participants provided actionable suggestions to improve the course in future iterations.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".