McFadyen A K, Webster V S, Maclaren W M
Division of Mathematics, School of Computing & Mathematical Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
J Interprof Care. 2006 Dec;20(6):633-9. doi: 10.1080/13561820600991181.
The original version of the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) was published by Parsell and Bligh in 1999. The only aspect of reliability considered by the authors was the internal consistency. A revised version for use with undergraduate students was published in 2005 (McFadyen et al., 2005). That paper also reported internal consistency of the revised version. Subsequently a sample from one professional group (n = 65) was used to assess test-retest reliability, over a one week period, of each of the 19 items and of the sub-scale totals, using Weighted Kappa and the intra-class correlation (ICC) respectively, and these results are reported in the present paper. The test-retest reliability of the individual items using Weighted Kappa was satisfactory, with the exception of two items (Items 11 and 12). The ICC results for the sub-scale totals were all in excess of 0.60 with the exception of sub-scale two. This revised version of RIPLS would appear to have good reliability in three of its sub-scales but further research, with larger samples, is required before the fourth sub-scale can be reliably assessed.
跨专业学习准备度量表（RIPLS）的原始版本由帕塞尔和布莱于1999年发表。作者所考虑的信度的唯一方面是内部一致性。2005年发表了一个供本科生使用的修订版（麦克法登等人，2005年）。该论文也报告了修订版的内部一致性。随后，从一个专业群体中抽取了一个样本（n = 65），分别使用加权卡帕系数和组内相关系数（ICC），在一周的时间内评估了19个项目中每个项目以及子量表总分的重测信度，本文报告了这些结果。使用加权卡帕系数对单个项目进行重测的信度结果令人满意，但有两个项目（项目11和12）除外。子量表总分的ICC结果除了子量表二之外均超过0.60。RIPLS的这个修订版在其三个子量表中似乎具有良好的信度，但在能够可靠地评估第四个子量表之前，还需要使用更大样本进行进一步研究。
