Article type
Abstract
"Background: Evidence-Based Medicine education for clinicians has been centred on the search, synthesis and, in particular, on the critical appraisal of clinical trial. This approach overemphasizes a methodological perspective, that becomes more complex with time and advances in clinical epidemiology methods, but alone of little usefulness in clinical practice, leaving behind practical aspects of contextualised evidence use.
Despite recent calls in the literature to move from a critical appraisal to a recommendation and evidence-based recommendation products (Clinical Practice Guidelines in particular, but also Health Technology Assessment reports), little of this practice is included on undergraduate curricula for clinicians, and few experiences of curricula reformulation are found reported.
Objective: To analyse the reformulation of an undergraduate Evidence-Based Medicine course from a critical appraisal basis to a recommendation-use and evidence summary basis.
Methods: We reformulated the skills listed in the curriculum of 18 weeks/108-hours undergraduate course on Evidence-Based Medicine from evidence search, synthesis and critical appraisal to identification of trustworthy evidence summaries (clinical practice guidelines) and interpretation of recommendations for clinical practice (Table 1). We compared the performance of students in the new course with the historical cohort of previous students using structured tests and problem-based learning tools. Students were also cross-evaluated in Internal Medicine course with applied clinical cases.
Results: This is an ongoing project, and the final results will be shared in the GES 2024. Preliminary results suggest that the new approach enhances students' application of recommendations and contextualised use of evidence in clinical practice settings, although diminished the skills related to identification of possible biases in literature.
Conclusion: Preliminary results indicate that students increased the adoption and use of summaries of evidence for clinical practice problems. It is expected that definitive results can support a change in curricula in Evidence-Based Care among undergraduates.
"
Despite recent calls in the literature to move from a critical appraisal to a recommendation and evidence-based recommendation products (Clinical Practice Guidelines in particular, but also Health Technology Assessment reports), little of this practice is included on undergraduate curricula for clinicians, and few experiences of curricula reformulation are found reported.
Objective: To analyse the reformulation of an undergraduate Evidence-Based Medicine course from a critical appraisal basis to a recommendation-use and evidence summary basis.
Methods: We reformulated the skills listed in the curriculum of 18 weeks/108-hours undergraduate course on Evidence-Based Medicine from evidence search, synthesis and critical appraisal to identification of trustworthy evidence summaries (clinical practice guidelines) and interpretation of recommendations for clinical practice (Table 1). We compared the performance of students in the new course with the historical cohort of previous students using structured tests and problem-based learning tools. Students were also cross-evaluated in Internal Medicine course with applied clinical cases.
Results: This is an ongoing project, and the final results will be shared in the GES 2024. Preliminary results suggest that the new approach enhances students' application of recommendations and contextualised use of evidence in clinical practice settings, although diminished the skills related to identification of possible biases in literature.
Conclusion: Preliminary results indicate that students increased the adoption and use of summaries of evidence for clinical practice problems. It is expected that definitive results can support a change in curricula in Evidence-Based Care among undergraduates.
"