Skip to main content

Table. 5 Self-reported understanding of evidence-based healthcare-related terms among Sudanese medical students (n = 761)

From: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) for undergraduate medical students in Sudan: sources of information, knowledge about terms, skills related to EBM and attitude toward EBM in Sudan

 

I understand and I could explain to others.

Some understanding.

Do not understand, but would like to understand.

Do not understand, but I think, it wouldn’t be helpful to me to understand

No idea about this

Terms related to study design:

 Case report

335 (44.0 %)

279 (36.7 %)

110 (14.5 %)

11 (1.4 %)

26 (3.4 %)

 Cohort study

286 (37.6 %)

278 (36.5 %)

135 (17.7 %)

13 (1.7 %)

49 (6.4 %)

 Randomized Controlled clinical trial

202 (26.5 %)

276 (36.3 %)

203 (26.7 %)

24 (3.2 %)

56 (7.4 %)

 Meta-analysis

115 (15.1 %)

275 (36.1 %)

277 (36.4 %)

28 (3.7 %)

66 (8.7 %)

 Systematic review

200 (26.3 %)

280 (36.8 %)

212 (27.9 %)

19 (2.5 %)

50 (6.6 %)

 Cross-sectional study

315 (41.4 %)

244 (32.1 %)

153 (20.1 %)

16 (2.1 %)

33 (4.3 %)

 Case–control study

342 (44.9 %)

235 (30.9 %)

139 (18.3 %)

14 (1.8 %)

31 (4.1 %)

Terms related to statistics:

 Confidence interval

146 (19.2 %)

284 (37.3 %)

236 (31.0 %)

20 (2.6 %)

75 (9.9 %)

 Sample size

330 (43.4 %)

250 (32.9 %)

122 (16.0 %)

17 (2.2 %)

42 (5.5 %)

 Mode

292 (38.4 %)

212 (27.9 %)

176 (23.1 %)

18 (2.4 %)

63 (8.3 %)

 Median

334 (43.9 %)

203 (26.7 %)

155 (20.4 %)

13 (1.7 %)

56 (7.4 %)

 Interquartile range (IQR)

146 (19.2 %)

239 (31.4 %)

263 (34.6 %)

31 (4.1 %)

82 (10.8 %)

 Standard deviation (SD)

248 (32.6 %)

250 (32.9 %)

174 (22.9 %)

28 (3.7 %)

61 (8.0 %)

 Precision and accuracy

145 (19.1 %)

245 (32.2 %)

269 (35.3 %)

27 (3.5 %)

75 (9.9 %)

 Representative sample

213 (28.0 %)

260 (34.2 %)

201 (26.4 %)

23 (3.0 %)

64 (8.4 %)

 Test power

103 (13.5 %)

233 (30.6 %)

305 (40.1 %)

29 (3.8 %)

91 (12.0 %)

P-value

146 (19.2 %)

252 (33.1 %)

241 (31.7 %)

32 (4.2 %)

90 (11.8 %)

 Type I and type II errors

114 (15.0 %)

247 (32.5 %)

281 (36.9 %)

26 (3.4 %)

93 (12.2 %)

Terms related to Epidemiology:

 Relative risk

248 (32.6 %)

275 (36.1 %)

170 (22.3 %)

15 (2.0 %)

53 (7.0 %)

 Absolute risk

223 (29.3 %)

273 (35.9 %)

197 (25.9 %)

19 (2.5 %)

49 (6.4 %)

 Odds ratio

175 (23.0 %)

269 (35.3 %)

227 (29.8 %)

22 (2.9 %)

68 (8.9 %)

 NNT (number needed to treat)

118 (15.5 %)

223 (29.3 %)

302 (39.7 %)

23 (3.0 %)

95 (12.5 %)

 Sensitivity of a diagnostic test

238 (31.3 %)

233 (30.6 %)

213 (28.0 %)

23 (3.0 %)

54 (7.1 %)

 Specificity of a diagnostic test

232 (30.5 %)

235 (30.9 %)

221 (29.0 %)

18 (2.4 %)

55 (7.2 %)

 Heterogeneity

138 (18.1 %)

213 (28.0 %)

296 (38.9 %)

34 (4.5 %)

80 (10.5 %)

 Publication bias

146 (19.2 %)

227 (29.8 %)

276 (36.3 %)

26 (3.4 %)

86 (11.3 %)

 Lost to follow-up

187 (24.6 %)

238 (31.3 %)

224 (29.4 %)

29 (3.8 %)

83 (10.9 %)

 Randomization

270 (35.5 %)

247 (32.5 %)

164 (21.6 %)

21 (2.8 %)

59 (7.8 %)

 Intention-to-treat analysis

115 (15.1 %)

211 (27.7 %)

310 (40.7 %)

24 (3.2 %)

101 (13.3 %)

 Prevalence

332 (43.6 %)

241 (31.7 %)

123 (16.2 %)

20 (2.6 %)

45 (5.9 %)

 Incidence

347 (45.6 %)

232 (30.5 %)

118 (15.5 %)

23 (3.0 %)

41 (5.4 %)

 Positive predictive value

163 (21.4 %)

231 (30.4 %)

260 (34.2 %)

28 (3.7 %)

79 (10.4 %)

 Hierarchy of evidence

117 (15.4 %)

200 (26.3 %)

315 (41.4 %)

28 (3.7 %)

101 (13.3 %)

 Clinical effectiveness

146 (19.2 %)

246 (32.3 %)

274 (36.0 %)

27 (3.5 %)

68 (8.9 %)

 Practical guideline

160 (21.0 %)

258 (33.9 %)

255 (33.5 %)

21 (2.8 %)

67 (8.8 %)

 Evidence-based medicine

230 (30.2 %)

279 (36.7 %)

186 (24.4 %)

23 (3.0 %)

43 (5.7 %)

  1. Data were presented as number (percentage)