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.