This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letter  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Medical Education  • Evidence-Based Medicine  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: The systematic review of instruments for evaluating education in evidence-based practice (EBP) by Dr Shaneyfelt and colleagues¹ is an essential first step for teachers of evidence-based medicine seeking valid instruments for assessing the effect of their teaching. However, I believe that their approach to evaluation of primary studies was too simplistic. While basic classification of instruments into knowledge, attitudes, or behaviors is appealing, detailed analyses might have been achieved through use of a more comprehensive classification system, such as Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives.² This would allow curriculum developers to identify instruments that test 1 of 20 specific subdomains within the broad cognitive, affective, or psychomotor domains.

In addition, conformity of their classification with existing recommendations for outcome assessment by educational networks such as Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME)³ would have aided better application within educational reviews. An example would be use of an objective scale based . . . [Full Text of this Article]

James Davis, BMedSci(Hons), MBChB
Baffoe1@yahoo.com
Birmingham Women's Hospital
Birmingham, England

RELATED LETTER

Evaluating Education in Evidence-Based Practice—Reply
Terrence M. Shaneyfelt and Michael Green
JAMA. 2007;297(1):39-40.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT