Suppr超能文献

医学生和专科医生如何评价印度尼西亚实习中的迷你临床演练评估(mini-CEX)。

How students and specialists appreciate the mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) in Indonesian clerkships.

机构信息

Department of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Gd. Prof. Drs. Med. R. Radiopoetro, Lt. 6 Sayap Barat, Jl. Farmako, Sekip Utara, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia.

Center for Education Development and Research in Health Professions, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

BMC Med Educ. 2020 May 8;20(1):144. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02062-z.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cultural differences might challenge the acceptance of the implementation of assessment formats that are developed in other countries. Acceptance of assessment formats is essential for its effectiveness; therefore, we explored the views of students and specialists on the practicality and impact on learning of these formats. This study was conducted to explore Indonesian students' and specialists' appreciation of the implementation of the Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) in Indonesian clerkships.

METHODS

This study was conducted at the Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. Participants were 52 students and 21 specialists in neurology and 78 students and 50 specialists in internal medicine. They were asked to complete a 19-item questionnaire that covered the characteristics of the mini-CEX such as its practicality, and the impact on learning and professional development. We used a Mann-Whitney U test to analyse the data.

RESULTS

In total, 124 students (46 from neurology and 78 from internal medicine) and 38 specialists (13 from neurology and 25 from internal medicine) participated in this study. Students and specialists were positive about the practicality of the mini-CEX and the impact of this assessment format on learning and on professional development. The Mann-Whitney U test showed that there were no significant differences between students' and specialists' opinions on the mini-CEX, except for 2 items: specialists' appreciation of direct observation (mean rank = 93.16) was statistically significantly higher than students' appreciation of it (mean rank = 77.93; z = 2.065; p < 0.05), but students' appreciation of the item that students' past mini-CEX results affected their recent mini-CEX outcomes (mean rank = 85.29) was significantly higher than specialists' appreciation of it (mean rank = 69.12; z = 2140; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Students and specialists were positive about the mini-CEX in Indonesian clerkships, although it was developed and validated in another culture. We found only small differences between their appreciations, which could be explained by the patterns of specialist-student interaction in Indonesian culture as large power distance and low individualism country.

摘要

背景

文化差异可能会对在其他国家开发的评估格式的接受产生挑战。评估格式的接受对于其有效性至关重要;因此,我们探讨了学生和专家对这些格式的实用性和对学习的影响的看法。本研究旨在探讨印度尼西亚学生和专家对印度尼西亚实习中微型临床评估练习(Mini-CEX)实施的看法。

方法

本研究在印度尼西亚的加查马达大学进行。参与者包括 52 名学生和 21 名神经病学专家以及 78 名学生和 50 名内科专家。他们被要求完成一份包含 Mini-CEX 特征的 19 项问卷,例如其实用性以及对学习和专业发展的影响。我们使用曼-惠特尼 U 检验来分析数据。

结果

共有 124 名学生(神经病学 46 名,内科 78 名)和 38 名专家(神经病学 13 名,内科 25 名)参加了这项研究。学生和专家对 Mini-CEX 的实用性以及这种评估格式对学习和专业发展的影响持积极态度。曼-惠特尼 U 检验显示,学生和专家对 Mini-CEX 的看法没有显著差异,只有 2 项除外:专家对直接观察的评价(平均秩=93.16)明显高于学生的评价(平均秩=77.93;Z=2.065;P<0.05),但学生对过去 Mini-CEX 结果影响最近 Mini-CEX 结果的项目的评价明显高于专家(平均秩=85.29;Z=2140;P<0.05)。

结论

尽管 Mini-CEX 是在另一种文化中开发和验证的,但印度尼西亚实习中的学生和专家对它持积极态度。我们发现他们的评价之间只有很小的差异,这可以用印度尼西亚文化中专家与学生互动的模式来解释,因为印度尼西亚是一个权力距离大、个人主义程度低的国家。

相似文献

2
Meeting international standards: a cultural approach in implementing the mini-CEX effectively in Indonesian clerkships.
Med Teach. 2014 Oct;36(10):894-902. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.917160. Epub 2014 Sep 2.
3
Implementation of a Mini-CEX Requirement Across All Third-Year Clerkships.
Teach Learn Med. 2016 Oct-Dec;28(4):424-431. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2016.1165682. Epub 2016 May 4.
6
Implementation of the mini-CEX to evaluate medical students' clinical skills.
Acad Med. 2002 Nov;77(11):1156-7. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200211000-00021.
8
Adaptation, psychometric properties, and implementation of the Mini-CEX in dental clerkship.
J Dent Educ. 2021 Mar;85(3):300-310. doi: 10.1002/jdd.12462. Epub 2020 Oct 22.
10
Using multiple assessments to evaluate medical students' clinical ability in psychiatric clerkships.
Acad Psychiatry. 2011 Fall;35(5):307-11. doi: 10.1176/appi.ap.35.5.307.

引用本文的文献

2
Assessment in Undergraduate Competency-Based Medical Education: A Systematic Review.
Cureus. 2024 Apr 11;16(4):e58073. doi: 10.7759/cureus.58073. eCollection 2024 Apr.
3
Current Trends in Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise in Medical Education: A Bibliometric Analysis.
Cureus. 2022 Dec 30;14(12):e33121. doi: 10.7759/cureus.33121. eCollection 2022 Dec.
4
The impact of the evaluations made by Mini-CEX on the clinical competency of nursing students.
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Aug 20;22(1):634. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03667-2.
5
A Pilot Study of Modified Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercises (Mini-CEX) in Rotation Students in the Department of Endocrinology.
Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2022 Jul 9;15:2031-2038. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S372253. eCollection 2022.
6
Intelligent virtual case learning system based on real medical records and natural language processing.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022 Mar 4;22(1):60. doi: 10.1186/s12911-022-01797-7.

本文引用的文献

1
Workplace-Based Assessment in Cross-Border Health Professional Education.
Teach Learn Med. 2020 Jan-Mar;32(1):91-103. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2019.1637742. Epub 2019 Jul 24.
3
Meeting international standards: a cultural approach in implementing the mini-CEX effectively in Indonesian clerkships.
Med Teach. 2014 Oct;36(10):894-902. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.917160. Epub 2014 Sep 2.
5
The assessment of professional competence: Developments, research and practical implications.
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 1996 Jan;1(1):41-67. doi: 10.1007/BF00596229.
6
Performance in assessment: consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa conference.
Med Teach. 2011;33(5):370-83. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2011.565831.
8
What costs complexity and what price simplicity?
Med Teach. 2009 Jun;31(6):475-6. doi: 10.1080/01421590802680602.

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