拉塞特临床判断量表：对教学有效性评估的启示。
The Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric: Implications for Evaluating Teaching Effectiveness.
出版信息
J Nurs Educ. 2021 Feb 1;60(2):67-73. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20210120-03.
BACKGROUND
Concern with patient safety necessitates valid and reliable measures to evaluate clinical judgment. The purpose of this article is to describe how the Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR) has been used to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions to promote clinical judgment and its psychometric properties.
METHOD
Search terms included nurse, student, clinical judgment, and Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric in Scopus, ERIC, and CINAHL with EBSCOhost databases. The final review included 20 studies.
RESULTS
Researchers reported alphas for total scales as .80 to .97, subscales as .89 to .93, and students' self-scored as .81 to .82. Themes were: Individual Versus Group Evaluations, Clinical Judgment Scenarios, and Adaptation for Nonobservation Activities.
CONCLUSION
Results of this review indicate that the LCJR can be used to evaluate clinical judgment, but educators need to consider inter- and intrarater reliability, individual versus group evaluation, clinical judgment scenarios, and adapting the rubric for nondirect observation activities. [J Nurs Educ. 2021;60(2):67-73.].
背景
对患者安全的关注需要有效和可靠的措施来评估临床判断。本文的目的是描述如何使用 Lasater 临床判断量表（LCJR）来评估促进临床判断的教育干预措施的有效性及其心理测量特性。
方法
在 Scopus、ERIC 和 CINAHL 与 EBSCOhost 数据库中使用了“护士、学生、临床判断和 Lasater 临床判断量表”等搜索词。最终的综述包括 20 项研究。
结果
研究人员报告了总量表的信度为.80 至.97，分量表的信度为.89 至.93，学生自我评分的信度为.81 至.82。主题包括：个体与小组评估、临床判断情景和非观察活动的适应。
结论
本综述的结果表明，LCJR 可用于评估临床判断，但教育工作者需要考虑评分者间和评分者内的可靠性、个体与小组评估、临床判断情景以及为非直接观察活动改编量表。[J Nurs Educ. 2021;60(2):67-73.]。
Zotero 插件