Table 3.

A Comparison of the Main Outcome Measures Between Volunteer Faculty (n = 177) and Full-time Faculty (n = 22)

	Volunteer
Outcome Measures*	Primary Care (n = 106)	Subspecialists (n = 71)	Full Time (n = 22)
Factor 1: Understanding of study type, sensitivity, and specificity, mean	3.5 ± 0.9	4.0 ± 0.8	3.9 ± 1.2†
Factor 2: Understanding of statistics used in articles, mean	2.9 ± 1.0	3.3 ± 0.9	3.6 ± 1.2‡
Factor 3: Importance of core EBM skills in daily practice, mean	2.9 ± 0.9	3.4 ± 0.8	4.0 ± 0.7§
Factor 4: Importance of epidemiology terms in daily practice, mean	3.6 ± 0.8	4.0 ± 0.7	4.0 ± 0.8†
EBM Test Score, mean	0.30 ± 0.17	0.34 ± 0.18	0.55 ± 0.27‖

^*Factor scores are based on a 5-point scale. EBM Test Score is calculated for those respondents answering 4 or more out of 7 questions (see Appendix at www.blackwellscience.com/jgi) and assuming questions unanswered are incorrect (n = 181). Q1–Q5 counted 1 point for each correct answer. The questions about the validity criteria for diagnostic test articles (Q6) and therapy articles (Q7) were counted as a fraction of correct responses. For instance, if the respondent listed 2 correct validity criteria for diagnostic test studies out of a possible 4, they received 0.5 points. Then, the sum of Q1 through Q7 was divided by 7.

^†Volunteer Primary Care score is significantly different from Volunteer Subspecialist score, P < .01.

^‡Volunteer Primary Care score is significantly different from Volunteer Subspecialist score as well as the Full-time Faculty score, both P < .01.

^§All 3 scores are significantly different from each other, P < .01.

^‖Full-time Faculty score is significantly different from both Volunteer Primary Care and Subspecialist Faculty scores, P < .01.