Development of Evaluation Tools for Dietitians of Canada’s Practice-based Evidence in Nutrition (PEN) Service
Loading...
Date
2009-04-16T12:30:13Z
Authors
Hemming, Janet Maureen
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Background: Evidence-based practice (EBP) uses the best available research evidence, in
combination with clinical expertise and client values, to guide practice decisions (1).
Dietitians recognize the benefits of using an evidence-based approach, but do not routinely
incorporate it into their practice (2, 3). Lack of time and the skills needed to find and
critically evaluate the published research are cited as barriers to adopting evidence-based
practice (3). The knowledge translation and transfer (KTT) process can assist in bridging
the gap between evidence and practice (4).
In September 2005, Dietitians of Canada (DC) launched Practice-based Evidence in
Nutrition (PEN), an online evidence-based knowledge translation/transfer (KTT) service for
dietetic practice. PEN must be evaluated to determine if the service meets the needs of users
and to assess its effectiveness as a KTT tool for incorporating evidence-based knowledge
into dietetic practice.
Objective: The aim of this research was to develop two evaluation tools for PEN: a webbased
questionnaire to collect demographic and quality assurance data (PEN Evaluation
Questionnaire) and a set of interview questions to evaluate PEN as medium for KTT and its
impact on dietetic practice (PEN Evaluation Interview Guide).
Methods: The questionnaire was developed using a structured four-step process. An
advisory panel (n=14) validated the researcher-developed questionnaire and guided the
development of its online format. The resulting questionnaire was pilot tested with a
purposive sample (n=19) of PEN subscribers and non-subscribers. The interview guide was
developed with the assistance of an expert panel (n=7) using a three round modified Delphi
process.
Results: The questionnaire development process resulted in a 46 item web-based
questionnaire to collect demographic and quality assurance data on the PEN service. The
findings confirm that successful questionnaire development requires the use of a systematic
approach including a comprehensive review of face and content validity.
The Delphi process was successful in bringing together a diverse group of experts with
extensive knowledge in KTT and EBP to produce an interview guide containing open-ended
questions focusing on respondents’ understanding of evidence-based practice and PEN, the
use of PEN by dietitians and other disciplines, the perception of the quality/usefulness of
PEN and barriers and facilitators to PEN use.
Conclusions: Quantitative and qualitative evaluation tools, validated by experts in the KTT
and dietetics fields, will provide a comprehensive evaluation of PEN’s impact on practice
and its effectiveness as a KTT tool and ensure the quality and relevance of the data
collected.
This research adds to the limited body of knowledge regarding the formal evaluation of online
evidence systems and KTT strategies.
Description
Keywords
Evaluation , Canada , Evidence-based medicine , Dietetics , Practice , Databases , PEN