An Instrument for Measuring Critical Appraisal Self-Efficacy in Rheumatology Trainees

Abstract

Objective: Self-efficacy, the internal belief that one can perform a specific task successfully, influences behavior. To promote critical appraisal of medical literature, rheumatology training programs should foster both competence and self-efficacy for critical appraisal. This study aimed to investigate whether select items from the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory (CRAI), an instrument measuring clinical research self-efficacy, could be used to measure critical appraisal self-efficacy (CASE). Methods: One hundred twenty-five trainees from 33 rheumatology programs were sent a questionnaire that included two sections of the CRAI. Six CRAI items relevant to CASE were identified a priori; responses generated a CASE score (total score range 0-10; higher = greater confidence in one's ability to perform a specific task successfully). CASE scores' internal structure and relation to domain-concordant variables were analyzed. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 112 of 125 (89.6%) trainees. CASE scores ranged from 0.5 to 8.2. The six CRAI items contributing to the CASE score demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.95) and unidimensionality. Criterion validity was supported by the findings that participants with higher CASE scores rated their epidemiology and biostatistics understanding higher than that of peers (P < 0.0001) and were more likely to report referring to studies to answer clinical questions (odds ratio 2.47, 95% confidence interval 1.41-4.33; P = 0.002). The correlation of CASE scores with percentage of questions answered correctly was only moderate, supporting discriminant validity. Conclusion: The six-item CASE instrument demonstrated content validity, internal consistency, discriminative capability, and criterion validity, including correlation with self-reported behavior, supporting its potential as a useful measure of critical appraisal self-efficacy.