摘要
目的建立一套能为广州市健康村创建工作指引方向并能较好地反映工作成效的评估指标体系。方法通过理论分析、文献回顾和专家访谈等方法初步构建广州市健康村评估指标体系,在此基础上、采用3轮专家咨询,包括2轮德尔菲法确定指标体系内容,1轮层次分析法确定各指标的权重。结果广州市健康村评估指标包括组织管理、建设健康环境、培养健康技能、提供健康服务、拥有健康人群、满意度和创建特色等7个一级指标、7个二级指标、46个三级指标入选。3轮咨询专家积极系数为94%、100%、93%。专家平均权威系数为0.85,2轮德尔菲法的专家协调系数分别为0.169、0.437(P<0.01)。层次分析法得到一级指标权向量为0.0546~0.2413,最大特征值为7.1558;二级指标的权向量值为0.0961~0.7992,最大特征值为2.0000~6.2462;三级指标的权向量为0.0630~0.6697,最大特征值为2.0000~7.1252。各判断矩阵的一致性比率CR为0~0.0391。结论广州市健康村评估指标体系指标合理,专家的代表性、积极性、权威程度及意见的协调程度较好,判断矩阵一致性比率符合要求,体现了多部门共建、定性与定量相结合、与时俱进的特点。
Objective To establishan evaluation index system for healthy village in Guangzhou City for guiding and evaluating the work. Methods The draft of the evaluation index system for healthy village was constructed based on theoret- ical analysis, literature review and expert interview methods. Then the experts consulting were runfor three rounds. Through two rounds of Delphi expert consultation, the framework of evaluation index system was constructed. The weights of the differ- ent indicators were also analyzed by Analytic Hierarchy Process （AHP）. Results The evaluation index system for healthy village included 7 first-level indicators, 7 second-level indicators and 46 third-level indicators. The positive coefficient of the experts in 3 rounds were 94% , 100% , 93% , respectively, the average authority degree of the experts was O. 85, and the coordination coefficient of expertise in two rounds of Delphi expert consultation were 0. 169 and 0. 437 （P 〈 0. 01 ） , respectively. The weight vectors were 0. 0546 -0. 2413 for the first-level indicators, 0. 0961 -O. 7992 for the second-level indica- tors, and 0. 0630 -0. 6697 for the third-level indicators, and the largest eigenvalue was 7. 1558 for the first-level indicators, 2. 0000 -6. 2462 for the second-level indicators, and 2. 0000 -7. 1252 for the third-level indicators. The consistency ratio of judgment matrix ranged from 0 to 0. 0391. Conclusion The evaluation indexsystem reflecting professional character- istics of sector partnership and combining qualitative analysis with quantitative analysiswas reliable. The representativeness, authority degree and coordination of expertwere good. The consistency ratio of judgment matrixmeet all relative requirements.
作者
何文雅
许信红
陈建伟
HE Wen-ya XU Xin-hong CHEN Jian-wei(Guangzhou Health Education Institute, Guangzhou 510403, China)
出处
《中国健康教育》
北大核心
2017年第3期195-198,219,共5页
Chinese Journal of Health Education
基金
广东省医学科研基金项目(B2014349)
关键词
德尔菲法
层次分析法
健康村
Delphi method
Analytic hierarchy process
Healthy village
