ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice (EBP) training is essential for undergraduate students in making sound clinical decisions during patient care. However, EBP training is not included in the curriculum of undergraduate dental students in India and there is a dearth of research that assessed the effectiveness of EBP training in India. Hence, this study aimed to assess the effectiveness of EBP training to dental undergraduate students. METHODS: Final year undergraduate students and interns of a dental institution participated in this pre and postexperimental study. All the participants received a 2-day workshop (didactic lectures, hands-on and group activities) in a classroom setting. A validated 35 item instrument titled EBP Knowledge, Attitudes, Access and Confidence questionnaire was used for the outcome assessment of EBP training. RESULTS: Fifty undergraduate students (33 interns and 17 final year) participated in the study. Statistically significant improvement was observed in six out of 10 items related to EBP knowledge. All the items related to attitude showed a significant positive change in scores. Only four out of nine items related to accessing evidence showed a statistically significant change. Participants reported moderate confidence gain in critical appraisal skills. CONCLUSION: The current study demonstrated moderate improvement in the effectiveness of EBP training in improving EBP knowledge, accessing evidence and critical appraisal skills.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Education, Dental/methods , Evidence-Based Dentistry/education , Educational Measurement , Humans , India , Internship and Residency , Students, Dental/psychology , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Significance testing for comparison of the baseline differences between the intervention arms has received a strong condemnation. The goal of this study was to assess the prevalence of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the baseline characteristics between intervention groups using significance tests in top ten impact factor dental journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: RCTs published in 10 high impact factor dental journals were searched in PubMed database. Literature search was limited to time duration of 5 years from September 2012 to August 2017. RESULTS: We analysed 521 RCTs after excluding 47 non-RCT articles from the total of 568 articles. Baseline demographic characteristics table was not reported in 45.9% of the RCTs and 26.2% of the RCTs did not report table of baseline clinical characteristics. In 38.9% of the studies, significance testing was employed to compare baseline differences between the intervention arms. CONCLUSIONS: Many trials published in the reputed dental journals failed to follow the recommendations of CONSORT statement regarding reporting of baseline tables and avoiding comparison of baseline differences with significance test.
