What Information Do Neuropsychologists Use to Guide their Clinical Decisions? A Survey on Knowledge and Application of Evidence-Based Practice in a French-Speaking Population.

IF 2.1 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Sacha Blause, Ezio Tirelli, Grégoire Wauquiez, Stéphane Raffard, Vincent Didone, Sylvie Willems
{"title":"What Information Do Neuropsychologists Use to Guide their Clinical Decisions? A Survey on Knowledge and Application of Evidence-Based Practice in a French-Speaking Population.","authors":"Sacha Blause, Ezio Tirelli, Grégoire Wauquiez, Stéphane Raffard, Vincent Didone, Sylvie Willems","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acad057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an approach that encourages clinicians to base their practice on evidence to improve the quality of patient care and reduce uncertainty in their clinical decisions. However, the state of knowledge and practice of neuropsychologists in French-speaking countries is still unknown. This study aimed to find out what these neuropsychologists know about EBP and whether they use it.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A questionnaire with 39 questions for French-speaking neuropsychologists was distributed. The questions focused on neuropsychologists' knowledge and use of EBP and information that guide their clinical decisions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 392 respondents started the survey. The data show that only 35% correctly defined EBP and there was confusion between this practice and the strict use of research data. In practice, their decisions are influenced by multiple factors, including the patient's difficulties and advice from peers. Regarding the research, a significant proportion of the sample stated that they did not search the scientific literature frequently. Barriers to accessing scientific information and ineffective article-reading behavior were highlighted.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A lack of knowledge of EBP among French-speaking neuropsychologists was observed. Furthermore, the factors influencing their decision-making do not clearly fit the definitions of EBP. Information-seeking behaviors show several weaknesses and barriers to the integration of scientific evidence into practice. These results are like those of other studies conducted among psychologists or in other health professions. We will discuss possible courses of action that could be implemented to improve the knowledge and use of EBP.</p>","PeriodicalId":8176,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"140-156"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acad057","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an approach that encourages clinicians to base their practice on evidence to improve the quality of patient care and reduce uncertainty in their clinical decisions. However, the state of knowledge and practice of neuropsychologists in French-speaking countries is still unknown. This study aimed to find out what these neuropsychologists know about EBP and whether they use it.

Method: A questionnaire with 39 questions for French-speaking neuropsychologists was distributed. The questions focused on neuropsychologists' knowledge and use of EBP and information that guide their clinical decisions.

Results: A total of 392 respondents started the survey. The data show that only 35% correctly defined EBP and there was confusion between this practice and the strict use of research data. In practice, their decisions are influenced by multiple factors, including the patient's difficulties and advice from peers. Regarding the research, a significant proportion of the sample stated that they did not search the scientific literature frequently. Barriers to accessing scientific information and ineffective article-reading behavior were highlighted.

Conclusion: A lack of knowledge of EBP among French-speaking neuropsychologists was observed. Furthermore, the factors influencing their decision-making do not clearly fit the definitions of EBP. Information-seeking behaviors show several weaknesses and barriers to the integration of scientific evidence into practice. These results are like those of other studies conducted among psychologists or in other health professions. We will discuss possible courses of action that could be implemented to improve the knowledge and use of EBP.

神经心理学家利用哪些信息指导临床决策?法语人群对循证实践的了解和应用调查。
目的:循证实践(EBP)是一种鼓励临床医生以证据为基础进行实践的方法,旨在提高患者护理质量,减少临床决策中的不确定性。然而,法语国家神经心理学家的知识和实践状况仍不为人知。本研究旨在了解这些神经心理学家对 EBP 的了解程度以及他们是否使用 EBP:方法:向法语国家的神经心理学家发放了一份包含 39 个问题的调查问卷。这些问题主要涉及神经心理学家对 EBP 的了解和使用情况,以及指导其临床决策的信息:共有 392 名受访者参与了调查。数据显示,只有 35% 的受访者正确定义了 EBP,而且这种做法与严格使用研究数据之间存在混淆。在实践中,他们的决定受到多重因素的影响,包括病人的困难和同行的建议。在研究方面,相当一部分样本表示他们并不经常搜索科学文献。他们在获取科学信息时遇到的障碍以及无效的文章阅读行为都得到了强调:结论:法语神经心理学家对 EBP 缺乏了解。此外,影响他们决策的因素并不明确符合 EBP 的定义。在将科学证据融入实践的过程中,信息搜索行为显示出一些弱点和障碍。这些结果与其他针对心理学家或其他医疗行业的研究结果相似。我们将讨论可能采取的行动方案,以提高对 EBP 的认识和使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
358
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes original contributions dealing with psychological aspects of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of disorders arising out of dysfunction of the central nervous system. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology will also consider manuscripts involving the established principles of the profession of neuropsychology: (a) delivery and evaluation of services, (b) ethical and legal issues, and (c) approaches to education and training. Preference will be given to empirical reports and key reviews. Brief research reports, case studies, and commentaries on published articles (not exceeding two printed pages) will also be considered. At the discretion of the editor, rebuttals to commentaries may be invited. Occasional papers of a theoretical nature will be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信