Ghosh NR, Esmaeilinezhad Z, Zając J, Creasy RA, Lorenz SG, Klatt KC, Bala MM, Beathard KM, Johnston BC. Evidence-Based Practice Competencies among Nutrition Professionals and Students: A Systematic Review.
J Nutr 2024;
154:1414-1427. [PMID:
38159813 PMCID:
PMC11347811 DOI:
10.1016/j.tjnut.2023.12.044]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2023] [Revised: 12/20/2023] [Accepted: 12/27/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Evidence-based practice (EBP) promotes shared decision-making between clinicians and patients.
OBJECTIVE
The aim was to determine EBP competencies among nutrition professionals and students reported in the literature.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review by searching Medline, Embase, CINAHL, ERIC, CENTRAL, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, BIOSIS Citation Index, and clinicaltrials.gov up to March 2023. Eligible primary studies had to assess one of the 6 predefined EBP competencies: formulating clinical questions; searching literature for best evidence; assessing studies for methodological quality; effect size; certainty of evidence for effects; and determining the applicability of study results considering patient values and preferences. Two reviewers independently screened articles and extracted data, and results were summarized for each EBP competency.
RESULTS
We identified 12 eligible cross-sectional survey studies, comprising 1065 participants, primarily registered dietitians, across 6 countries, with the majority assessed in the United States (n = 470). The reporting quality of the survey studies was poor overall, with 43% of items not reported. Only 1 study (8%) explicitly used an objective questionnaire to assess EBP competencies. In general, the 6 competencies were incompletely defined or reported (e.g., it was unclear what applicability and critical appraisal referred to and what study designs were appraised by the participants). Two core competencies, interpreting effect size and certainty of evidence for effects, were not assessed.
CONCLUSIONS
The overall quality of study reports was poor, and the questionnaires were predominantly self-perceived, as opposed to objective assessments. No studies reported on competencies in interpreting effect size or certainty of evidence, competencies essential for optimizing clinical nutrition decision-making. Future surveys should objectively assess core EBP competencies using sensible, specific questionnaires. Furthermore, EBP competencies need to be standardized across dietetic programs to minimize heterogeneity in the training, understanding, evaluation, and application among dietetics practitioners. This study was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42022311916.
Collapse