基于网络的教育干预提高卫生科学专业人员系统评价知识的研究卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析随机对照试验%一个Krnic Martinic,玛丽娜%Čivljak,玛尔塔%一丸š我ć,安娜% Sapunar,一%一个Poklepović仙女č我ć,蒂娜% Buljan, Ivan % Tokalić,俄文žica %一个马里š,Snjež安娜% Neuberg, Marijana %一个Ivaniš增强型植被指数ć,型% Aranza,戴安娜% Skitarelić,Nataš%一个Zoranić,Sanja %臭鼬š我ć,Štefica %Čavić,Dalibor % Puljak,利维亚% +天主教大学的克罗地亚,242年Ilica萨格勒布,10000年,克罗地亚,385 13706 600,livia.puljak@gmail.com %K教育干预%K系统评价%K健康科学专业人员%K知识%K随机对照试验%D 2022 %7 25.8.2022 %9背景:缺乏系统评价(SRs)的知识可能会阻碍个体卫生保健专业人员在临床实践中使用SRs作为信息来源，或使他们不愿参与此类研究。目的:在这个随机对照试验中，我们评估了一个简短的基于网络的教育干预对SRs短期知识的影响。方法:871名克罗地亚大学健康科学专业硕士生;589名(67.6%)同意参加试验的学生通过计算机程序随机分为两组。干预组A(294/589, 49.9%)接受了一个简短的基于网络的关于SR方法的教育干预，干预组B(295/589, 50.1%)接受了PRISMA(系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目)清单。在干预前和干预后，对参与者的社会责任知识进行了评估。由于干预的性质，参与者不能被蒙蔽。主要结果是干预后各组中每个参与者关于SR方法的正确答案百分比的差异，以相对风险和95% CI表示。 Results: Results from 162 and 165 participants in the educational intervention and PRISMA checklist groups, respectively, were available for analysis. Most of them (educational intervention group: 130/162, 80.2%; PRISMA checklist group: 131/165, 79.4%) were employed as health care professionals in addition to being health sciences students. After the intervention, the educational intervention group had 23% (relative risk percentage) more correct answers in the postintervention questionnaire than the PRISMA checklist group (relative risk=1.23, 95% CI 1.17-1.29). Conclusions: A short web-based educational intervention about SRs is an effective tool for short-term improvement of knowledge of SRs among health care studies students, most of whom were also employed as health care professionals. Further studies are needed to explore the long-term effects of the tested education. Trial Registration: OSF Registries 10.17605/OSF.IO/RYMVC; https://osf.io/rymvc %M 36006686 %R 10.2196/37000 %U //www.mybigtv.com/2022/8/e37000 %U https://doi.org/10.2196/37000 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36006686