METHODS: The EBMQ was developed based on a qualitative study, literature review and an expert panel. Face and content validity was verified by the expert panel and piloted among 10 participants. Primary care physicians with or without EBM training who could understand English were recruited from December 2015 to January 2016. The EBMQ was administered at baseline and two weeks later. A higher score indicates better knowledge, better practice of EBM and less barriers towards the implementation of EBM. We hypothesized that the EBMQ would have three domains: knowledge, practice and barriers.
RESULTS: The final version of the EBMQ consists of 80 items: 62 items were measured on a nominal scale, 22 items were measured on a 5 point Likert-scale. Flesch reading ease was 61.2. A total of 343 participants were approached; of whom 320 agreed to participate (response rate = 93.2%). Factor analysis revealed that the EBMQ had eight domains after 13 items were removed: "EBM websites", "evidence-based journals", "types of studies", "terms related to EBM", "practice", "access", "patient preferences" and "support". Cronbach alpha for the overall EBMQ was 0.909, whilst the Cronbach alpha for the individual domain ranged from 0.657-0.940. The EBMQ was able to discriminate between doctors with and without EBM training for 24 out of 42 items. At test-retest, kappa values ranged from 0.155 to 0.620.
CONCLUSIONS: The EBMQ was found to be a valid and reliable instrument to assess the knowledge, practice and barriers towards the implementation of EBM among primary care physicians in Malaysia.
METHODS: Data were collected from a self-administered questionnaire distributed among 164 Year 2 medical students. The 5-point Likert scale anchored by Strongly disagree = 1 and Strongly agree = 5 included 36 questions in four domains designed to assess the perception of a biostatistics and epidemiology module amongst students.
RESULTS: 138 students with ages ranging from 20 to 24 years (Mean = 20.7; SD = 0.62) returned their responses to the questionnaire. This was a response rate of 84.14%. Of the 138 students, 80.7% realized the relevance of the subject to real health issues at the end of the module, while 89.8% believed the module focused on interpretation more than calculation.More than three quarters (78.1%) agreed that lack of practicing exercises was the cause for declining interest in the subject, while only 26.1% believed that lectures were not interesting. Another three quarters (75.4%) believed that there were too many lectures for one day of teaching activities, while 84.6% recommended practical sessions for designing research and data collection.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found that students perceived the relevance of biostatistics and epidemiology to real health issues. The major cause of poor interest in the subject was attributed to the short duration of the course, lack of practicing exercises, and the need for practical data collection sessions. Emphasis should be given to early introduction of projects for data collection and analysis.