Claims

Most included studies sampled medical students (n=13), with few studies among nursing, pharmacy, physiotherapy, dentistry, or mixed disciplines

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2021: baselines and conditions change

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? Of the 20 included studies, the majority sampled medical students (n=13), with nursing (n=2), pharmacy (n=2), physiotherapy/therapy (n=1), dentistry (n=1), or mixed disciplines (n=1). → 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 · r2

Descriptive synthesis of the 20 included studies' characteristics. The review reports "The majority of the studies sampled medical students (n=13) and only few conducted among nursing (n=2), pharmacy (n=2), physiotherapy/therapy (n=1), dentistry (n=1), or mixed disciplines (n=1) students."

"The majority of the studies sampled medical students (n=13) and only few conducted among nursing (n=2), pharmacy (n=2), physiotherapy/therapy (n=1), dentistry (n=1), or mixed disciplines (n=1) students."

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.