Department of Health Psychology and Behavioural Medicine, Institute of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Department of Anaesthesiology and Pain Therapy, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 31;15(12):e0244816. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244816. eCollection 2020.
Debriefing is essential for effective learning during simulation-based medical education. To assess the quality of debriefings, reliable and validated tools are necessary. One widely used validated tool is the Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing (OSAD), which was originally developed in English. The aim of this study was to translate the OSAD into German, and to evaluate the reliability and validity of this German version (G-OSAD) according the 'Standards of Educational and Psychological Measurement'. In Phase 1, the validity evidence based on content was established by a multistage cross-cultural adaptation translation of the original English OSAD. Additionally, we collected expert input on the adequacy of the content of the G-OSAD to measure debriefing quality. In Phase 2, three trained raters assessed 57 video recorded debriefings to gather validity evidence based on internal structure. Interrater reliability, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and composite reliability were examined. Finally, we assessed the internal structure by applying confirmatory factorial analysis. The expert input supported the adequacy of the content of the G-OSAD to measure debriefing quality. Interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient) was excellent for the average ratings (three raters: ICC = 0.848; two raters: ICC = 0.790), and good for the single rater (ICC = 0.650). Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.976), internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's α = 0.865), and composite reliability was excellent (ω = 0.93). Factor analyses supported the unidimensionality of the G-OSAD, which indicates that these G-OSAD ratings measure debriefing quality as intended. The G-OSAD shows good psychometric qualities to assess debriefing quality, which are comparable to the original OSAD. Thus, this G-OSAD is a tool that has the potential to optimise the quality of debriefings in German-speaking countries.
在基于模拟的医学教育中，反思是有效学习的关键。为了评估反馈的质量，需要可靠和经过验证的工具。一个广泛使用的经过验证的工具是客观结构化的反馈评估（OSAD），它最初是用英语开发的。本研究的目的是将 OSAD 翻译成德语，并根据“教育和心理测量标准”评估这个德语版本（G-OSAD）的可靠性和有效性。在第 1 阶段，通过对原始英语 OSAD 进行多阶段跨文化适应性翻译，建立了基于内容的有效性证据。此外，我们还收集了专家对 G-OSAD 内容充分性的意见，以衡量反馈质量。在第 2 阶段，三名经过培训的评分者评估了 57 个视频记录的反馈，以收集基于内部结构的有效性证据。评估了评分者间信度、重测信度、内部一致性和综合信度。最后，我们通过应用验证性因素分析来评估内部结构。专家的意见支持 G-OSAD 内容充分性来衡量反馈质量。平均评分的评分者间信度（三个评分者：ICC = 0.848；两个评分者：ICC = 0.790）和单个评分者的评分者间信度（ICC = 0.650）均为优秀。重测信度为优秀（ICC = 0.976），内部一致性可接受（Cronbach's α = 0.865），综合信度优秀（ω = 0.93）。因子分析支持 G-OSAD 的单维性，这表明这些 G-OSAD 评分是按照预期衡量反馈质量的。G-OSAD 具有评估反馈质量的良好心理测量学质量，与原始 OSAD 相当。因此，这种 G-OSAD 是一种有潜力优化德语国家反馈质量的工具。
