• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评估巴林马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷的信度和效度。

Evaluating the Reliability and Validity of the Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire in Bahrain.

作者信息

Al Ansari Ahmed, Tabbara Khaled Saeed

机构信息

Training and Education Department, Bahrain Defense Force Hospital, Riffa, Bahrain.

Medical Education Department, College of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Bahrain.

出版信息

Oman Med J. 2019 Sep;34(5):427-433. doi: 10.5001/omj.2019.78.

DOI:10.5001/omj.2019.78
PMID:31555419
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6745430/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (MCTQ) was developed to evaluate clinical teachers' supervisory skills during undergraduate clinical rotations. Evidence exists supporting the reliability and validity of this questionnaire. Our study sought to examine the reliability and validity of the MCTQ in a Middle Eastern context.

METHODS

Between 2016 and 2017, we evaluated a total of 549 medical students in their final year who were undergoing clinical rotations using the MCTQ. The construct validity was assessed using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Internal consistency reliability was measured using Cronbach's alpha. Factor scores were compared with other outcomes to explore the relationship with other relevant variables.

RESULTS

A four-factor model demonstrated an adequate fit with the data. The findings showed good internal consistency reliability. The following results were obtained for the four-factor model: chi-square divided by degrees of freedom was 5.026, and the comparative index, goodness of fit index, normalized fit index, and non-normalized fit index were all above 0.800 (0.955, 0.858, 0.950, and 0.952, respectively). The standardized root mean square residual was 0.016, and the root mean square error of approximation score was 0.086. Acceptable reliability was achieved with 10 evaluations per teacher. We observed a strong correlation between factors and overall judgment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that the MCTQ is a valid and reliable instrument to evaluate teachers' performance during clinical rotations in Bahrain.

摘要

目的

马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷(MCTQ)旨在评估本科临床实习期间临床教师的指导技能。有证据支持该问卷的信效度。我们的研究旨在检验MCTQ在中东地区的信效度。

方法

在2016年至2017年期间,我们使用MCTQ对549名正在进行临床实习的医学专业大四学生进行了评估。通过探索性和验证性因素分析评估结构效度。使用克朗巴哈系数测量内部一致性信度。将因素得分与其他结果进行比较,以探讨与其他相关变量的关系。

结果

一个四因素模型与数据拟合良好。研究结果显示出良好的内部一致性信度。四因素模型的结果如下:卡方值除以自由度为5.026,比较指数、拟合优度指数、标准化拟合指数和非标准化拟合指数均高于0.800(分别为0.955、0.858、0.950和0.952)。标准化均方根残差为0.016,近似误差均方根得分为0.086。每位教师进行10次评估可获得可接受的信度。我们观察到各因素与总体评价之间存在强相关性。

结论

我们的研究表明,MCTQ是评估巴林临床实习期间教师表现的有效且可靠的工具。

相似文献

1
Evaluating the Reliability and Validity of the Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire in Bahrain.评估巴林马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷的信度和效度。
Oman Med J. 2019 Sep;34(5):427-433. doi: 10.5001/omj.2019.78.
2
Validating the modified System for Evaluation of Teaching Qualities: a teaching quality assessment instrument.验证改进后的教学质量评估系统:一种教学质量评估工具。
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2018 Nov 30;9:881-886. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S181094. eCollection 2018.
3
The Internal Reliability and Construct Validity of the Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire (EBPQ): Evidence from Healthcare Professionals in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.基于证据的实践问卷(EBPQ)的内部信度和结构效度:来自东地中海地区医疗保健专业人员的证据。
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Jul 31;11(15):2168. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11152168.
4
The Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (MCTQ) as a valid and reliable instrument for the evaluation of clinical teachers.马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷 (MCTQ) 作为评估临床教师的有效且可靠的工具。
Acad Med. 2010 Nov;85(11):1732-8. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181f554d6.
5
Assessing Preceptor Use of Cognitive Apprenticeship: Is the Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (MCTQ) a Useful Approach?评估带教老师对认知学徒制的运用:马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷(MCTQ)是一种有用的方法吗?
Teach Learn Med. 2019 Oct-Dec;31(5):506-518. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2019.1604356. Epub 2019 May 7.
6
Developing and Testing the Validity and Reliability of the Brief Adolescent Respiratory System Health Assessment Scale-Student Version in a Chinese Sample.在中国样本中开发并测试青少年呼吸系统健康简易评估量表-学生版的有效性和可靠性。
Front Pediatr. 2021 Aug 17;9:713066. doi: 10.3389/fped.2021.713066. eCollection 2021.
7
Analysis of psychometric properties of the modified SETQ tool in undergraduate medical education.本科医学教育中改良版SETQ工具的心理测量特性分析
BMC Med Educ. 2017 Mar 16;17(1):56. doi: 10.1186/s12909-017-0893-4.
8
Development and psychometric testing of a Learning Behaviour Questionnaire among Chinese undergraduate nursing students.开发并检验中文版本科护生学习行为问卷的信效度。
BMJ Open. 2021 Jun 14;11(6):e043711. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043711.
9
Brief adult respiratory system health status scale-community version (BARSHSS-CV): developing and evaluating the reliability and validity.简易成人呼吸系统健康状况量表-社区版(BARSHSS-CV):信效度的开发与评估
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Sep 3;18(1):683. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3505-z.
10
Psychometric Properties Evaluation of Persian Version of the Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire.《马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷波斯语版的心理测量学特性评估》
Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2023 Sep 8;28(5):581-586. doi: 10.4103/ijnmr.ijnmr_324_21. eCollection 2023 Sep-Oct.

引用本文的文献

1
Psychometric Properties Evaluation of Persian Version of the Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire.《马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷波斯语版的心理测量学特性评估》
Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2023 Sep 8;28(5):581-586. doi: 10.4103/ijnmr.ijnmr_324_21. eCollection 2023 Sep-Oct.
2
Psychometric Properties of the Persian Questionnaire for Evaluation of Clinical Teaching at Outpatient Settings.用于评估门诊临床教学的波斯语问卷的心理测量特性。
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2020 Aug 17;11:549-555. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S261350. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

1
Understanding how residents' preferences for supervisory methods change throughout residency training: a mixed-methods study.了解住院医师在整个住院医师培训期间对监督方法的偏好如何变化:一项混合方法研究。
BMC Med Educ. 2015 Oct 16;15:177. doi: 10.1186/s12909-015-0462-7.
2
Developing a clinical teaching quality questionnaire for use in a university osteopathic pre-registration teaching program.开发一份用于大学整骨疗法预注册教学项目的临床教学质量问卷。
BMC Med Educ. 2015 Apr 8;15:70. doi: 10.1186/s12909-015-0358-6.
3
An instrument for evaluating clinical teaching in Japan: content validity and cultural sensitivity.
日本临床教学评估工具:内容效度与文化敏感性
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Aug 28;14:179. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-14-179.
4
The effects of contributing to patient care on medical students' workplace learning.参与患者护理对医学生工作场所学习的影响。
Med Educ. 2013 Dec;47(12):1184-96. doi: 10.1111/medu.12217.
5
Evaluation of clinical teaching in general practice using the Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire.使用马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷对全科医学临床教学进行评估。
Med Teach. 2012;34(12):1089. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.716562. Epub 2012 Aug 30.
6
Evaluating clinical teachers with the Maastricht clinical teaching questionnaire: how much 'teacher' is in student ratings?用马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷评估临床教师:学生评价中有多少是“教师”?
Med Teach. 2012;34(4):320-6. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.660220.
7
Exploring the validity and reliability of a questionnaire for evaluating veterinary clinical teachers' supervisory skills during clinical rotations.探索评估兽医临床教师在临床轮转期间监督技能的问卷的有效性和可靠性。
Med Teach. 2011;33(2):e84-91. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2011.536277.
8
The Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (MCTQ) as a valid and reliable instrument for the evaluation of clinical teachers.马斯特里赫特临床教学问卷 (MCTQ) 作为评估临床教师的有效且可靠的工具。
Acad Med. 2010 Nov;85(11):1732-8. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181f554d6.
9
Combined student ratings and self-assessment provide useful feedback for clinical teachers.学生综合评价和自我评估为临床教师提供了有益的反馈。
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2010 Aug;15(3):315-28. doi: 10.1007/s10459-009-9199-6. Epub 2009 Sep 25.
10
The development of an instrument for evaluating clinical teachers: involving stakeholders to determine content validity.临床教师评估工具的开发:让利益相关者参与以确定内容效度。
Med Teach. 2008;30(8):e272-7. doi: 10.1080/01421590802258904.