Currently submitted to: JMIR Medical Education
Date Submitted: Jan 27, 2026
Open Peer Review Period: Jan 28, 2026 - Mar 25, 2026
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Impact of Educational Interventions on Evidence-Based Medicine Skills: A Systematic Review of Fresno Test Outcomes in Residents and General Practitioners
ABSTRACT
Background:
While Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) is a fundamental pillar of modern healthcare, its implementation into general practice is often hindered by time constraints, resource deficits, and the inherent complexity of primary care. This challenge is further exacerbated by a lack of consensus on EBM instruction, highlighting a critical need for standardized educational frameworks.
Objective:
To systematically synthesize intervention studies evaluating the effectiveness of EBM training, including EBM skills, and the impact of EBM on reactions, behavioral changes, attitudes, and practices among general practitioners and residents in family medicine.
Methods:
We conducted a systematic synthesis of interventional studies that used the Fresno test to assess EBM skills among residents or general practitioners after educational interventions (lectures, workshops, journal clubs, or e-learning program). A comprehensive search was performed across the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline databases for records published between January 1980 and July 2025. Study quality was assessed using the Modified Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MMERSQI), and risk of bias was evaluaAmong the 200 records screened, eight studies involving 431 participants (residents and general practitioners) met the inclusion criteria. Study designs included one randomized controlled trial, six before–after studies, and one cross-sectional study. Mean methodological quality (MMERSQI) was 65.3 (SD 7.2). One study had a low risk of bias, five had a moderate risk, and two were rated as presenting with a high risk of bias, mainly due to confounding factors and selection into analysis. Six studies reported significant improvement in Fresno test scores after training, with mean score increases ranging from 4% to 60% (p<0.05), and two found no significant change. The greatest benefits were achieved after interactive or clinically integrated sessions combining lectures, workshops, or journal clubs. Participants reported higher confidence in applying EBM (+3.2 points on the Likert scale) and greater engagement with research (+2.5 hours of reading and 3.5 additional articles per week). ted using RoB 2 for randomized studies and ROBINS-I v2 for non-randomized studies. Owing to study heterogeneity, results were synthesized qualitatively.
Results:
Among the 200 records screened, eight studies involving 431 participants (residents and general practitioners) met the inclusion criteria. Study designs included one randomized controlled trial, six before–after studies, and one cross-sectional study. Mean methodological quality (MMERSQI) was 65.3 (SD 7.2). One study had a low risk of bias, five had a moderate risk, and two were rated as presenting with a high risk of bias, mainly due to confounding factors and selection into analysis. Six studies reported significant improvement in Fresno test scores after training, with mean score increases ranging from 4% to 60% (p<0.05), and two found no significant change. The greatest benefits were achieved after interactive or clinically integrated sessions combining lectures, workshops, or journal clubs. Participants reported higher confidence in applying EBM (+3.2 points on the Likert scale) and greater engagement with research (+2.5 hours of reading and 3.5 additional articles per week).
Conclusions:
EBM training for residents and general practitioners improves both knowledge and practical application of evidence-based skills, particularly when it is interactive or clinically integrated. Evidence remains limited regarding long-term retention and patient-related outcomes.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.