期刊文献+

体格检查实践教学质量评价问卷的研制及信效度检验 被引量:2

Developing a questionnaire to evaluate learning outcome of physical exam and testing its validity and reliability
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:为提高医学生体格检查临床技能培训质量,开发医学生对临床技能质量评价问卷,并对其进行信度与效度评价,检验满意度工具的科学性,为工具的广泛应用提供依据。方法:选取山西医科大学临床医学七年制本硕生125名,由3名经过培训的教师使用原始问卷进行调查,使用问卷进行调查和访谈。对调查结果进行探索性因子分析,结合因子分析的结果和专家组讨论,对条目进行筛选和调整,并进行信度和效度检验。结果:最终形成的体格检查实践教学质量评价问卷由7个因子、24条目组成,7个因子的累计解释率为68.613%;问卷的CVI系数为0.812,Cronbach'sα系数为0.847,均在测量学可接受的范围。结论:最终形成的体格检查实践教学质量评价问卷有较好的信效度及可行性,可作为体格检查实践教学质量的评价工具。 In order to improve the quality of medical students' physical examination and chnical skill training, medical students were evaluated on the clinical skills quality evaluation questionnaire, and their reliability and validity were evaluated. The scientificity of the satisfaction tools was tested and the basis for the wide application of tools was provided. Methods A total of 125 students in the seven-year program of clini- cal medicine at Shanxi Medical University were selected. Three trained teachers used the original questionnaire to conduct surveys and use questionnaires to conduct surveys and interviews. The exploratory factor analysis of the survey results was combined with the results of the factor analysis and the discussion of the expert group.The entries were screened and adjusted, and the reliability and validity tests were performed. Results The final quality assessment questionnaire for physical examination practice consists of 7 factors and 24 items. The cumulative interpretation rate of the 7 factors is 68.613 % ; the CVI coefficient of the questionnaire is 0. 812, and the Cronbach' s a coefficient is 0. 847, both of which are acceptable in measurement. The range. Conclusion The final quality assessment questionnaire of physical examination practice teaching has a good reliability and validity, and it can be used as an evaluation tool for physical examination practice teaching quality.
作者 张亚民 王斌全 刘继斌 郭晓晶 范益民 王淑丽 Zhang Yamin1 , Wang Binquan2, Liu Jibin1 , et al(1. Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, China ;2. The First Hospital Affiliated to Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, China)
出处 《中国高等医学教育》 2018年第3期54-56,共3页 China Higher Medical Education
基金 2015年山西省高等学校教学改革项目([2015]41) 2015年"深化临床医学人才培养改革"相关研究成果评估和扶持项目
关键词 体格检查 信度 效度 调查问卷 Physical examination Validity Reliability Questionnaire
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献20

  • 1李灿,辛玲.调查问卷的信度与效度的评价方法研究[J].中国卫生统计,2008,25(5):541-544. 被引量:475
  • 2Wynd CA,Schmidt B,Schaefer MA.Two quantitative approachesfor estimating content validity[J].Western J Nurs Res,2003,25(5):508–518.
  • 3Lindell MK,Brandt CJ,Whitney DJ.A revised index of interrateragreement for multi-item ratings of a single target[J].Appl PsycholMeasurem,1999,23(2):127–135.
  • 4Lawshe CH.A quantitative approach to content validity[J].Personne Psychol,1975,28(4):563–575.
  • 5Hambleton RK,Swaminathan H,Algina J,et al.Criterion-referencedtesting and measurement:Review of technical issues anddevelopments[J].Rev Educat Res,1978,48(1):11–22.
  • 6Martuza VR.Applying norm-referenced and criterion-referenced measurement in education[M].Boston:Allyn andBacon,1977:275–293.
  • 7Lynn MR.Determination and quantification of content validity[J].Nursing Res,1986,35(6):382–385.
  • 8Davis LL.Instrument review:Getting the most from your panel ofexperts[J].Appl Nurs Res,1992,5(4):194–197.
  • 9Polit DF,Beck CT.The content validity index:are you sure youknow what’s being reported?critique and recommendations[J].Res Nurs Health,2006,29(5):489–497.
  • 10Nora JJ.Causes old and new modes,mechanisms and models.Am Heart J,1993,125:1409

共引文献1486

同被引文献17

引证文献2

二级引证文献16

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部