Claims

The review found inconclusive evidence regarding the best time to introduce EBP teaching into the health curriculum

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? The review's findings provide inconclusive evidence regarding the best possible time for EBP introduction to the health curriculum, with some supporting first-year inclusion and others later introduction after research methods training. → Kyriakoulis Konstantinos 2016

Evidence

Kyriakoulis Konstantinos 2016

Kyriakoulis Konstantinos, Patelarou Athina, Laliotis Aggelos, Wan Andrew C, Matalliotakis Michail, Tsiou Chrysoula, Patelarou Evridiki. (2016). Educational strategies for teaching evidence-based practice to undergraduate health students: systematic review. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5066070/

q2 · i? · review · r3

Discussion-section statement from the review's narrative synthesis. The review reports "inconclusive evidence regarding the best possible time for EBP introduction to the health curriculum", noting cited work supporting first-year inclusion versus later introduction after research methods training.

"Our findings provide us with inconclusive evidence regarding the best possible time for EBP introduction to the health curriculum."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.