Bridging the academic-clinical gap: a comparative cross-sectional analysis of self-reported evidence-based practice...

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is a core competency in contemporary nursing; however, the academic-to-clinical transition represents a critical period during which self-reported EBP engagement and associated research activity may diverge. Limited evidence exists on how these characteristics differ between senior nursing students and clinical interns within the same single-institution educational context.

A comparative cross-sectional, between-group study was conducted among 260 undergraduate nursing learners at Northern Border University, Saudi Arabia, comprising 118 fourth-year students and 142 interns. Data were collected using the validated Student Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire (S-EBPQ), a self-report instrument assessing frequency of EBP-related practice, attitudes toward EBP, retrieving and reviewing evidence, and sharing and applying EBP; the instrument was administered in its original English form, which is the formal language of nursing instruction at the participating institution, with linguistic clarity verified through expert review and a pilot pretest. Descriptive statistics, group comparisons, effect sizes, and multivariable linear regression with robust standard errors were used to examine differences and predictors of total self-reported EBP engagement. Given the cross-sectional design, findings were interpreted as between-group differences rather than developmental change.

Interns demonstrated significantly higher total self-reported EBP engagement scores than fourth-year students (5.05 ± 0.96 vs. 4.61 ± 1.16, p = 0.001), with the largest differences observed in practice-oriented domains. Fourth-year students reported more favorable attitudes toward EBP (p = 0.025). In adjusted analyses, internship status (p = 0.024), prior research publication (p = 0.010), and age 22-25 years (p = 0.007) were independent positive correlates of EBP engagement, whereas male sex was negatively associated (p = 0.026). Grade point average was not associated with EBP engagement. The model accounted for a modest proportion of variance (adjusted R ² ≈ 10.6%), indicating that unmeasured contextual factors likely contribute substantially to between-group differences.

Self-reported EBP engagement was higher among interns than fourth-year students, particularly in applied domains, while favorable attitudes acquired during academic study appeared lower in the intern group. Structured clinical exposure and active research participation were associated with stronger EBP engagement, although the cross-sectional design and structural co-occurrence of internship status with research experience preclude causal inference. Nursing curricula should integrate practice-centered and research-engaged strategies to support sustained EBP development across the academic-clinical transition, with future longitudinal and objectively measured studies needed to confirm developmental claims.