Sladek Ruth M, Phillips Paddy A, Bond Malcolm J
School of Medicine, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008 May 28;8:20. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-8-20.
Understanding how doctors think may inform both undergraduate and postgraduate medical education. Developing such an understanding requires valid and reliable measurement tools. We examined the measurement properties of the Inventory of Cognitive Bias in Medicine (ICBM), designed to tap this domain with specific reference to medicine, but with previously questionable measurement properties.
First year postgraduate entry medical students at Flinders University, and trainees (postgraduate doctors in any specialty) and consultants (N = 348) based at two teaching hospitals in Adelaide, Australia, completed the ICBM and a questionnaire measuring thinking styles (Rational Experiential Inventory).
Questions with the lowest item-total correlation were deleted from the original 22 item ICBM, although the resultant 17 item scale only marginally improved internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.61 compared with 0.57). A factor analysis identified two scales, both achieving only alpha = 0.58. Construct validity was assessed by correlating Rational Experiential Inventory scores with the ICBM, with some positive correlations noted for students only, suggesting that those who are naïve to the knowledge base required to "successfully" respond to the ICBM may profit by a thinking style in tune with logical reasoning.
The ICBM failed to demonstrate adequate content validity, internal consistency and construct validity. It is unlikely that improvements can be achieved without considered attention to both the audience for which it is designed and its item content. The latter may need to involve both removal of some items deemed to measure multiple biases and the addition of new items in the attempt to survey the range of biases that may compromise medical decision making.
了解医生的思维方式可能会为本科和研究生医学教育提供参考。要形成这样的理解需要有效且可靠的测量工具。我们研究了医学认知偏差量表(ICBM)的测量特性,该量表旨在专门针对医学领域来探究这一范畴,但之前其测量特性存在问题。
弗林德斯大学一年级医学研究生、澳大利亚阿德莱德两家教学医院的实习生(任何专业的住院医生)和顾问(N = 348)完成了ICBM以及一份测量思维方式的问卷(理性经验量表)。
原始的22项ICBM中,与总分相关性最低的问题被删除,尽管由此得到的17项量表仅略微提高了内部一致性(Cronbach's alpha系数从0.57提高到0.61)。一项因素分析确定了两个量表,二者的alpha系数均仅为0.58。通过将理性经验量表得分与ICBM进行相关性分析来评估结构效度,结果仅在学生中发现了一些正相关,这表明那些对“成功”回答ICBM所需知识库缺乏经验的人,可能会受益于与逻辑推理相契合的思维方式。
ICBM未能展现出足够的内容效度、内部一致性和结构效度。如果不充分考虑其设计的受众群体及其项目内容,就不太可能实现改进。后者可能需要既删除一些被认为测量多种偏差的项目,又添加新项目,以试图涵盖可能影响医疗决策的各种偏差。