Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Objective:

This study examines whether the psychometric properties of the short version of the Evidence-Based Practice Process Assessment Scale (EBPPAS) remain satisfactory when translated and transferred to the context of Swedish welfare services.

Method:

The Swedish version of EBPPAS was tested on a sample of community-based professionals in social care services and health care services (n = 710). Internal consistency, test–retest reliability (n = 95), and the factor structure were examined.

Results:

The findings support the scale’s reliability. Both α values and test–retest coefficients were satisfactory or excellent for the entire scale and for each of its four sections. A four-component structure was achieved. Thus, the results are consistent with previous research on the EBPPAS.

Conclusion:

The study provides support for the EBPPAS, short version, to be used in evaluating EBP implementation efforts in Sweden.

Keywords

evidence-based practice EBPPAS psychometric properties reliability

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bartlett

M. S.

(1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16, 296–298.

Cohen

J. W.

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

DeVillis

R. F.

(2003). Scale development. Theory and applications (2nd ed.). Applied Social Research Methods, Volume 26. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Fixsen

D. L.

Naoom

S. D.

Blasé

K. A.

Friedman

R. M.

Wallace

(2005). Implementation research. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute. The National Implementation Network.

Gambrill

(1999). Evidence-based practice: An alternative to authority based practice. Family in Society: The journal of Contemporary Human Services, 80, 341–350.

Gibbs

L. E.

(2003). Evidence-based practice for the helping professions: A practical guide with integrated multimedia. Pacific Grove, CA: Brood/Cole-Thomson Learning.

Haynes

R. B.

Devereaux

P. J.

Guyatt

C. H.

(2002). Clinical expertise in the era of evidence-based medicine and patient choice. Evidence Based Medicine, 7, 36–38.

Kaiser

(1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrica, 39, 31–36.

Kerlinger

(1986). Foundations of behavioral research. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

10.

Meyers

D. C.

Durlak

J. A.

Wandersman

(2012). The quality implementation framework: A synthesis of critical steps in the implementation process. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50, 462–480.

11.

Mullen

E. J.

(2014). Evidence based knowledge in the context of social practice. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 42, 59–73.

12.

Parrish

Rubin

(2011). Validation of the evidence-based practice process assessment scale—Short version. Research on Social Work Practice, 21, 200–11.

13.

Rogers

(2003). Diffusions of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

14.

Rubin

Parrish

(2010). Development and validation of the evidence-based process assessment scale: Preliminary findings. Research on social work practice, 20, 629–640.

15.

Sackett

D. L.

Rosenberg

W. M. C.

Gray

J. A. M.

Haynes

R. B.

Richardson

W. S.

(1996). Evidence-based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 13(312), 71–72.

16.

Shlonsky

Mildon

(2014). Methodological pluralism in the age of evidence-informed practice. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 42, 18–27.

17.

Socialstyrelsen. (2014). Evidensbaserad praktik i Socialtjänsten, 2007, 2010, 2013. [Evidence based practice in social services 2007, 2010] Managers report the use of Evidence based practice and evidence based interventions. Socialstyrelsen: National Board of Health and Welfare.

18.

Sundell

Soydan

Tengvald

Anttila

(2010). From opinion-based to Evidence based social work: The Swedish Case. Research on Social Work Practice, 20, 714–722.