Suppr超能文献

临床研究人员研究能力评估:系统评价。

Assessments of Research Competencies for Clinical Investigators: A Systematic Review.

机构信息

216035Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

出版信息

Eval Health Prof. 2021 Sep;44(3):268-278. doi: 10.1177/0163278719896392. Epub 2019 Dec 23.

Abstract

Although there is extensive research literature on clinical skill competencies and the use of competency-based frameworks for clinical research, the appropriate methods to assess these competencies are not as well understood. Our goal in this systematic literature review is to identify, compare, and critique assessments of clinical research competencies. Articles were included in this review if they examined clinical investigators or clinical investigators in training, focused on research-based skills, and included some form of assessment of research-based competencies. A total of 76 articles were identified as part of the initial search; 16 met the criteria for inclusion. Two types of assessments of clinical research competence were identified: subjective self-assessments ( = 13) and objective tests ( = 6). These assessments covered a wide range of competencies, but there were no competency domains common to all. Most assessments had limited validation. Training was consistently associated with self-assessed competence but had little relationship to objective measures of competence. In contrast, experience was consistently associated with objectively assessed competence but not with self-assessed competence. These findings have important implications for those interested in assessing medical education programs. We describe a recommended standard for validity for assessments used for the purposes of summative program assessment.

摘要

尽管有大量关于临床技能能力的研究文献和基于能力的临床研究框架的使用,但评估这些能力的适当方法还不是很清楚。我们在这项系统文献综述中的目标是确定、比较和批评临床研究能力的评估方法。如果文章考察了临床研究人员或临床研究培训人员,侧重于基于研究的技能,并且包括对基于研究的能力的某种形式的评估,则将其纳入本综述。最初搜索共确定了 76 篇文章;其中 16 篇符合纳入标准。确定了两种类型的临床研究能力评估:主观自我评估(= 13)和客观测试(= 6)。这些评估涵盖了广泛的能力,但没有一个共同的能力领域。大多数评估的验证程度有限。培训与自我评估的能力始终相关,但与客观评估的能力没有关系。相比之下,经验与客观评估的能力始终相关,但与自我评估的能力无关。这些发现对那些有兴趣评估医学教育项目的人具有重要意义。我们描述了一种推荐的有效性标准,用于总结性项目评估目的的评估。

相似文献

1
Assessments of Research Competencies for Clinical Investigators: A Systematic Review.
Eval Health Prof. 2021 Sep;44(3):268-278. doi: 10.1177/0163278719896392. Epub 2019 Dec 23.
2
Ability of Ophthalmology Residents to Self-Assess Their Performance Through Established Milestones.
J Surg Educ. 2019 Jul-Aug;76(4):1076-1087. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2018.12.004. Epub 2019 Mar 5.
3
The effectiveness of internet-based e-learning on clinician behavior and patient outcomes: a systematic review protocol.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):52-64. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1919.
4
Supervisor versus self-assessment of trainee competence: Differences across developmental stages and competency domains.
J Clin Psychol. 2023 Dec;79(12):2959-2973. doi: 10.1002/jclp.23590. Epub 2023 Sep 9.
5
Paramedic Disaster Health Management Competencies: A Scoping Review.
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2019 Jun;34(3):322-329. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X19004357. Epub 2019 May 28.
6
Facilitating Learner-Centered Transition to Residency: A Scoping Review of Programs Aimed at Intrinsic Competencies.
Teach Learn Med. 2021 Jan-Mar;33(1):10-20. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2020.1789466. Epub 2020 Sep 18.
10
When should I attempt my centrally administered summative assessments in the RANZCP competency-based training program?
Australas Psychiatry. 2016 Dec;24(6):615-619. doi: 10.1177/1039856216671649. Epub 2016 Sep 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Mentorship among healthcare researchers: a social network analysis.
Front Health Serv. 2025 Jul 17;5:1514379. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2025.1514379. eCollection 2025.
2
An Assessment of Clinical Research Self-Efficacy among Researchers at the Largest Healthcare Institute in Qatar: Recommendations and Future Actions.
J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2024 Jun 7;11:23821205241233425. doi: 10.1177/23821205241233425. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
4
Mentoring in research: development of competencies for health professionals.
BMC Nurs. 2023 Jul 26;22(1):244. doi: 10.1186/s12912-023-01411-9.
6
Research Education in Medical Curricula: a Global Analysis.
Med Sci Educ. 2022 Apr 4;32(2):495-502. doi: 10.1007/s40670-022-01542-9. eCollection 2022 Apr.
7
Self-assessed Competencies of Clinical Research Professionals and Recommendations for Further Education and Training.
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2022 Jul;56(4):607-615. doi: 10.1007/s43441-022-00395-z. Epub 2022 Mar 31.

本文引用的文献

1
Developing a core competency model for translational medicine curriculum.
Korean J Med Educ. 2018 Sep;30(3):243-256. doi: 10.3946/kjme.2018.99. Epub 2018 Aug 27.
2
A Program for Promoting Clinical Scholarship in General Surgery.
J Surg Educ. 2018 Jul-Aug;75(4):854-860. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2018.01.001. Epub 2018 Feb 3.
4
Development and Evaluation of Two Abbreviated Questionnaires for Mentoring and Research Self-Efficacy.
Ethn Dis. 2017 Apr 20;27(2):179-188. doi: 10.18865/ed.27.2.179. eCollection 2017 Spring.
5
Never Waste a Good Crisis: Confronting Reproducibility in Translational Research.
Cell Metab. 2016 Sep 13;24(3):348-360. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2016.08.006.
6
Assessing Competencies in a Master of Science in Clinical Research Program: The Comprehensive Competency Review.
Clin Transl Sci. 2015 Dec;8(6):770-5. doi: 10.1111/cts.12322. Epub 2015 Aug 29.
7
Flawed Self-Assessment: Implications for Health, Education, and the Workplace.
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2004 Dec;5(3):69-106. doi: 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x. Epub 2004 Dec 1.
8
Decline of clinical research in academic medical centers.
Neurology. 2015 Sep 29;85(13):1171-6. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000001818. Epub 2015 Jul 8.
10
Funding transdisciplinary research. NIH Roadmap/Common Fund at 10 years.
Science. 2014 Jul 18;345(6194):274-6. doi: 10.1126/science.1255860. Epub 2014 Jun 19.

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