Suppr超能文献

一种用于测量全科医生会诊技能的工具的可靠性研究:LIV-MAAS量表。

A reliability study of an instrument for measuring general practitioner consultation skills: the LIV-MAAS scale.

作者信息

Enzer Ian, Robinson Jude, Pearson Maggie, Barton Stuart, Walley Tom

机构信息

Prescribing Research Group, Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, UK.

出版信息

Int J Qual Health Care. 2003 Oct;15(5):407-12. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzg056.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the reliability of a new tool, the LIV-MAAS, in assessing consultation competence in UK general practice.

DESIGN

These were pilot studies, with small numbers of participants. Videoed general practitioner (GP) consultations were analysed by trained lay and professional raters, using the LIV-MAAS. The inter-rater reliabilities were assessed. Four videos were assessed by five raters in a pilot study. After this, 71 consultations from eight doctors were assessed by sets of three raters.

MAIN MEASURES

Inter-rater reliabilities and inter-consultation reliabilities.

RESULTS

For the pilot study, the estimated inter-rater reliability ranged from 0.69 (one rater) to 0.91 (five raters). For the main study, the estimated inter-rater reliability for the LIV-MAAS checklist using two raters was 0.71, and using three raters it was 0.78. Mean differences in reliability within each series of nine consultations were 0.20 (three raters) and 0.42 (two raters).

CONCLUSIONS

As a measure of 'consultation competence', administered by trained raters (medical or lay) to real GP consultations, the LIV-MAAS instrument shows adequate reliability and stability but would benefit from considerable shortening. Further development of the LIV-MAAS and testing with larger samples are required.

摘要

目的

评估一种新工具LIV-MAAS在评估英国全科医疗会诊能力方面的可靠性。

设计

这些是小规模参与者的试点研究。由经过培训的非专业和专业评分者使用LIV-MAAS对全科医生(GP)会诊视频进行分析。评估评分者间的信度。在一项试点研究中,5名评分者对4段视频进行了评估。在此之后,3组评分者对来自8名医生的71次会诊进行了评估。

主要测量指标

评分者间信度和会诊间信度。

结果

在试点研究中,估计的评分者间信度范围为0.69(1名评分者)至0.91(5名评分者)。在主要研究中,使用两名评分者时,LIV-MAAS清单的估计评分者间信度为0.71,使用三名评分者时为0.78。在每组9次会诊中,信度的平均差异分别为0.20(三名评分者)和0.42(两名评分者)。

结论

作为一种由经过培训的评分者(医学专业或非专业)对真实的全科医生会诊进行评估的“会诊能力”测量工具,LIV-MAAS工具显示出足够的可靠性和稳定性,但需要大幅缩短。需要对LIV-MAAS进行进一步开发并使用更大样本进行测试。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验