Skip to main content

Table 2 Mean (SD) and p values for factorial ANOVA for three EBP training groups (n = 880), for four stages of training (n = 915) and for five discipline groups (n = 887) for Relevance, Terminology, Confidence, Practice and Sympathy.

From: Evidence based practice profiles: Differences among allied health professions

 

Domain (max possible score)

 

Relevance (70)

mean (SD)

Terminology (85)

mean (SD)

Confidence (55)

mean (SD)

Practice (45)

mean (SD)

Sympathy (35)

mean (SD)

Prior exposure to EBP

     

No training n = 618

49 (10)a

40 (12)a

34 (8)a

21 (7)ab

21 (3)a

≤ 20 h training n = 106

55 (8)a

47 (13)a

35 (6)

23 (5)a

22 (4)ab

> 20 h training n = 156

58 (8)a

52 (11)a

37 (8)a

24 (7)b

21 (4)b

p value

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

0.003

Stage of training

     

1st year n = 236

45 (8)a

36 (13)a

34 (7)a

20 (7)a

21 (3)a

2nd year n = 300

52 (10)a

43 (11)a

34 (8)b

22 (7)a

21 (4)b

3rd/4th year n = 345

54 (9)a

46 (12)a

35 (8)c

21 (6)b

21 (4)c

Post-graduate n = 34

61 (7)a

60 (15)a

40 (10)abc

27 (7)ab

26 (4)ab c

p value

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

Discipline groups

     

Physiotherapy n = 242

56 (8)abc

50 (11)abc

35 (8)

22 (6)abc

21 (4)

Podiatry n = 44

53 (10)de

47 (14)def

37 (7)a

22 (6)d

21 (4)

Occupational Therapy n = 171

53 (9)afg

40 (12)ad

35 (8)

25 (7)adef

21 (3)

Medical Radiation n = 173

48 (8)bdf

40 (11.0)be

35 (7)

19 (6)be

21 (3)

Human Movement n = 257

46 (10)ceg

38 (13)cf

33 (8)a

20 (6)cf

21 (3)

p value

< 0.001

< 0.001

0.006

< 0.001

0.802

  1. Groups with the same superscript are significantly different to each other within the same domain. For example, in stage of training groups for Confidence, post-graduates scored significantly higher than 1st, 2nd and 3rd/4th years but the latter three groups did not score significantly differently to each other.