Defining Core Evidence-Based Practice Knowledge for Health Professionals: A Delphi Consensus Study

A clearly defined content domain is needed to assess whether health professionals possess the conceptual knowledge required for Evidence-Based Practice (EBP). Existing competency frameworks and assessment instruments often combine knowledge with skills, attitudes and behaviours, limiting the identification of specific knowledge deficits. This study aimed to define the core EBP knowledge domain and obtain content validity evidence for a taxonomy applicable across health professions.

The study comprised three phases. First, two structured literature reviews identified relevant EBP competency frameworks and knowledge assessment instruments. These findings informed the operational definition of the EBP knowledge construct and the development of a preliminary seven-dimension taxonomy. Content validity was then examined through a two-round Delphi study. Eighteen experts participated in the first round and 17 in the second. Panellists rated the adequacy and relevance of each dimension and content area using a six-point Likert scale and provided qualitative feedback. Agreement was defined as the proportion of experts assigning a score of 5 or 6, with a retention threshold of at least 80% for both criteria.

After the first Delphi round, several areas were reformulated, redistributed or removed to reduce conceptual overlap, and two dimensions were eliminated. In the second round, all retained dimensions and areas reached the agreement threshold except one newly introduced area, which was removed. The final taxonomy comprised 15 content areas organised into five dimensions: clinical question formulation, scientific literature search, critical appraisal, evidence implementation and knowledge translation, and evaluation of the EBP process.

The taxonomy provides a consensus-informed representation of core EBP knowledge and distinguishes conceptual knowledge from broader professional competence. It offers a basis for future objective assessment development and for identifying knowledge gaps in EBP training and implementation initiatives.