Understanding and Usefulness of Effect Size and Certainty of Evidence: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Evidence-Based Practice Competencies Among US Registered Dietitians
Rattachement africain : us, au, ca. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
INTRODUCTION: Understanding of absolute and relative effect estimates, and determining effect size and certainty of evidence corresponding to effect estimates, represent fundamental evidence-based practice competencies that promote informed clinical decision-making. While research has been conducted in the medical profession, based on our literature review there is no published research on these competencies in the nutrition and dietetics profession. METHODS: Among registered dietitians, our main objectives were to assess (1) their understanding and perceived usefulness of three absolute and two relative effect estimate approaches to determine effect size, (2) their perceived usefulness of certainty of evidence, and (3) factors influencing their understanding and perceived usefulness. We conducted a web-based, cross-sectional survey by recruiting dietitians from the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (United States). Participants received effect estimates based on hypothetical dietary interventions vs. usual diet for reducing myocardial infarction risk. RESULTS: = 114) were included in our analysis. Participants demonstrated a similar understanding of the relative (27.6%) and absolute (27.5%) effect estimates, with Risk Difference being the best understood approach and Number Needed to Treat being the least (30.7% vs. 24.6% correct responses). While perceived usefulness scores were similar between five approaches, they were highest when data was presented as Relative Risk [mean (SD): 4.82 (1.50)]. Dietitians rated the usefulness of certainty of evidence favorably [mean (SD): 5.07 (1.83), on a 7-point scale], and no factors were associated with correct understanding. CONCLUSION: Dietitians may have limited understanding of effect size thresholds presented in our survey, a finding mostly consistent with surveys of other health professionals. To optimize informed decision-making between dietitians and clients, dietetic programs and continuing education platforms should consider additional training on effect estimate approaches (relative and absolute), and determining effect sizes and certainty of evidence for effect estimates.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Understanding and Usefulness of Effect Size and Certainty of Evidence: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Evidence-Based Practice Competencies Among US Registered Dietitians
- Date Crossref
- 01/09/2026
- Éditeur
- Informa UK Limited
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Department of Health Services Research pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Texas A&M University pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
University of Wollongong pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Case Western Reserve University Department of Nutrition pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
University of Alberta Department of Pediatrics pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
SUNY Oneonta pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
University of Toronto Department of Nutritional Sciences pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Department of Nutrition pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Faculty of Science pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Department of Human Ecology pays non établi dans la noticeInstitution
-
School of Public Health Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
Department of Health Services Research — The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Texas A&M University et University of Wollongong, avec 8 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.