Purpose: Existing measures of evidence-based practice (EBP) in rehabilitation provide a fragmented interpretation of EBP competencies as performance is rated on discrete domains without a harmonized measure to represent the multidimensionality of EBP. Building on previous work, this study aimed to provide evidence that a brief multidimensional index can be formed to determine a clinician's propensity to integrate research evidence into decision-making to inform the subsequent development process. Methods: Using a Canadian dataset of occupational and physical therapists (n=127) who responded to a survey containing 70 frequently used items to measure EBP (representing six domains), one item per key EBP domain was selected using Rasch measurement theory and expert consensus. A preliminary scoring algorithm was developed for testing purposes. The interpretability of the prototype index was examined across characteristics of the sample and compared to full EBP measures using generalized estimating equations. Results: Five items were selected for inclusion in the prototype index representing the dimensions of use of research evidence, self-efficacy, resources, attitudes, and activities. Testing demonstrated that the prototype behaves consistently regardless of age groups, gender, and setting, and provides comparable information to full EBP measures. Conclusion: This study provides promising preliminary evidence to justify continuing the index development process. The benefits of having a global index of EBP as opposed to having multiple domain-specific measures are discussed in this paper.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant number 148544).

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Institutional Review Board of McGill University gave ethical approval for this work. Institutional Review Board of McMaster University gave ethical approval for this work. Institutional Review Board of Queen's University gave ethical approval for this work. Institutional Review Board of Dalhousie University gave ethical approval for this work. Institutional Review Board of University of Toronto gave ethical approval for this work. Institutional Review Board of University of British Columbia gave ethical approval for this work. Institutional Review Board of University of Ottawa gave ethical approval for this work. Institutional Review Board of University of Saskatchewan gave ethical approval for this work.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.