Roine Irmeli, Molina Yerko, Cáneo Marianella
Medical Faculty, University Diego Portales, Santiago, Chile.
School of Psychology, University Adolfo Ibáñez, Santiago, Chile.
Educ Health (Abingdon). 2018 Sep-Dec;31(3):148-154. doi: 10.4103/efh.EfH_17_18.
The Dundee Ready Education Environment Measure (DREEM) is used in the curricular development of future health professionals worldwide, but often without first locally testing its psychometric qualities, for example, construct validity and internal consistency. These characteristics are modified by different environments, but must be locally appropriate to obtain unequivocal and reliable conclusions about the strong and weak areas of a curriculum. Here, we report the results of the psychometric testing of DREEM results in our institution in Chile.
All 1-5-year undergraduate medical students were asked to respond the DREEM questionnaire. The construct validity of the results was assessed by an exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and their internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's α. The Institutional Review Board approved the study, and each student signed an informed consent.
A total of 304 (88%) eligible students, aged 22 ± 2 years, 46% of females, answered the questionnaire. The EFA determined four instead of the original DREEM's five subareas with clearly different item contents. The inner consistencies of the locally defined subareas of teaching, learning, teachers and organizational aspects, and self-perception surpassed the originals with Cronbach's α values of 0.79, 0.78, 0.77, and 0.82, respectively.
The optimal psychometric structure to accurately interpret our DREEM results differed from both the original and previous similar studies, including one from Chile. There are several potential explanations for these differences, but most importantly, they underline the need to first define the psychometric characteristics of the test results, to obtain accurate conclusions about the strengths and the weaknesses of a curriculum.
邓迪教育环境就绪度测量量表(DREEM)在全球未来卫生专业人员的课程开发中得到应用,但通常没有首先在当地对其心理测量学特性进行测试,例如结构效度和内部一致性。这些特性会因不同环境而有所改变,但必须适用于当地情况,才能就课程的优势和劣势得出明确可靠的结论。在此,我们报告智利我们机构对DREEM结果进行心理测量学测试的结果。
邀请所有1至5年级的本科医学生回答DREEM问卷。通过探索性因子分析(EFA)评估结果的结构效度,并用Cronbach's α评估其内部一致性。机构审查委员会批准了该研究,每位学生签署了知情同意书。
共有304名(88%)符合条件的学生,年龄为22±2岁,46%为女性,回答了问卷。探索性因子分析确定了四个而非原始DREEM的五个子领域,其项目内容明显不同。当地定义的教学、学习、教师和组织方面以及自我认知等子领域的内部一致性超过了原始量表,Cronbach's α值分别为0.79、0.78、0.77和0.82。
准确解释我们的DREEM结果的最佳心理测量结构与原始研究及之前的类似研究均不同,包括来自智利的一项研究。对于这些差异有多种潜在解释,但最重要的是,它们强调了首先定义测试结果心理测量学特征的必要性,以便就课程的优势和劣势得出准确结论。