Direct short-term effects of EBP teaching: change in knowledge, not in attitude; a cross-cultural comparison among students from European and Asian medical schools

INTRODUCTION We report about the direct short-term effects of a Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-based Medicine (CE-EBM) module on the knowledge, attitude, and behavior of students in the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMCU), Universitas Indonesia (UI), and University of Malaya (UM). METHODS We used an adapted version of a 26-item validated questionnaire, including four subscales: knowledge, attitude, behavior, and future use of evidence-based practice (EBP). The four components were compared among the students in the three medical schools before the module using one-way ANOVA. At the end of the module, we measured only knowledge and attitudes. We computed Cronbach's α to assess the reliability of the responses in our population. To assess the change in knowledge and attitudes, we used the paired t-test in the comparison of scores before and after the module. RESULTS In total, 526 students (224 UI, 202 UM, and 100 UMCU) completed the questionnaires. In the three medical schools, Cronbach's α for the pre-module total score and the four subscale scores always exceeded 0.62. UMCU students achieved the highest pre-module scores in all subscales compared to UI and UM with the comparison of average (SD) score as the following: knowledge 5.04 (0.4) vs. 4.73 (0.69) and 4.24 (0.74), p<0.001; attitude 4.52 (0.64) vs. 3.85 (0.68) and 3.55 (0.63), p<0.001; behavior 2.62 (0.55) vs. 2.35 (0.71) and 2.39 (0.92), p=0.016; and future use of EBP 4.32 (0.59) vs. 4.08 (0.62) and 3.7 (0.71), p<0.01. The CE-EBM module increased the knowledge of the UMCU (from average 5.04±0.4 to 5.35±0.51; p<0.001) and UM students (from average 4.24±0.74 to 4.53±0.72; p<0.001) but not UI. The post-module scores for attitude did not change in the three medical schools. CONCLUSION EBP teaching had direct short-term effects on knowledge, not on attitude. Differences in pre-module scores are most likely related to differences in the system and infrastructure of both medical schools and their curriculum.