Suppr超能文献

混合方法工具验证:从瑞士评价跨专业合作工具的验证中发展而来的从业者评估程序。

Mixed methods instrument validation: Evaluation procedures for practitioners developed from the validation of the Swiss Instrument for Evaluating Interprofessional Collaboration.

机构信息

Bern University of Applied Sciences, School of Health Professions, Bern, Switzerland.

Academic-Practice-Partnership of Bern University of Applied Sciences and Insel Gruppe, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Jan 25;23(1):83. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09040-3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Quantitative and qualitative procedures are necessary components of instrument development and assessment. However, validation studies conventionally emphasise quantitative assessments while neglecting qualitative procedures. Applying both methods in a mixed methods design provides additional insights into instrument quality and more rigorous validity evidence. Drawing from an extensive review of the methodological and applied validation literature on mixed methods, we showcase our use of mixed methods for validation which applied the quality criteria of congruence, convergence, and credibility on data collected with an instrument measuring interprofessional collaboration in the context of Swiss healthcare, named the Swiss Instrument for Evaluating Interprofessional Collaboration.

METHODS

We employ a convergent parallel mixed methods design to analyse quantitative and qualitative questionnaire data. Data were collected from staff, supervisors, and patients of a university hospital and regional hospitals in the German and Italian speaking regions of Switzerland. We compare quantitative ratings and qualitative comments to evaluate the quality criteria of congruence, convergence, and credibility, which together form part of an instrument's construct validity evidence.

RESULTS

Questionnaires from 435 staff, 133 supervisors, and 189 patients were collected. Analysis of congruence potentially provides explanations why respondents' comments are off topic. Convergence between quantitative ratings and qualitative comments can be interpreted as an indication of convergent validity. Credibility provides a summary evaluation of instrument quality. These quality criteria provide evidence that questions were understood as intended, provide construct validity, and also point to potential item quality issues.

CONCLUSIONS

Mixed methods provide alternative means of collecting construct validity evidence. Our suggested procedures can be easily applied on empirical data and allow the congruence, convergence, and credibility of questionnaire items to be evaluated. The described procedures provide an efficient means of enhancing the rigor of an instrument and can be used alone or in conjunction with traditional quantitative psychometric approaches.

摘要

背景

定量和定性程序是仪器开发和评估的必要组成部分。然而,验证研究通常强调定量评估,而忽略定性程序。在混合方法设计中应用这两种方法可以提供对仪器质量的更多见解,并提供更严格的有效性证据。根据对混合方法的方法学和应用验证文献的广泛回顾,我们展示了我们在验证中使用混合方法的情况,该方法应用了在瑞士医疗保健背景下测量跨专业合作的仪器“瑞士跨专业合作评估仪器”中使用的数据的一致性、收敛性和可信度质量标准。

方法

我们采用收敛并行混合方法设计来分析定量和定性问卷数据。数据来自瑞士德语和意大利语地区的一所大学医院和区域医院的工作人员、主管和患者。我们比较定量评分和定性评论,以评估一致性、收敛性和可信度的质量标准,这些标准共同构成仪器构念有效性证据的一部分。

结果

共收集了 435 名工作人员、133 名主管和 189 名患者的问卷。一致性分析可能提供了为什么受访者的评论离题的解释。定量评分和定性评论之间的收敛可以解释为收敛有效性的指示。可信度提供了仪器质量的综合评估。这些质量标准提供了问题被理解为预期的证据,提供了构念有效性,并且还指出了潜在的项目质量问题。

结论

混合方法提供了收集构念有效性证据的替代方法。我们建议的程序可以轻松应用于经验数据,并允许评估问卷项目的一致性、收敛性和可信度。所描述的程序提供了一种增强仪器严谨性的有效方法,可以单独使用或与传统的定量心理测量方法结合使用。

相似文献

2
The measurement of collaboration within healthcare settings: a systematic review of measurement properties of instruments.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):138-97. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-2159.
4
Readiness to change for interprofessional collaboration in healthcare: Development and validation of a theory-based instrument.
J Interprof Care. 2018 Sep;32(5):539-548. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2018.1448371. Epub 2018 Mar 28.
5
An evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Australian Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool.
PLoS One. 2024 May 9;19(5):e0302834. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302834. eCollection 2024.
6
Development and validation of Simulation Scenario Quality Instrument (SSQI).
BMC Med Educ. 2023 Dec 19;23(1):972. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04935-5.
7
Instruments measuring interprofessional collaboration in healthcare - a scoping review.
J Interprof Care. 2020 Mar-Apr;34(2):147-161. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2019.1637336. Epub 2019 Jul 23.
9
Development and validation of a tool to assess self-efficacy for competence in interprofessional collaborative practice.
J Interprof Care. 2017 Mar;31(2):255-262. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2016.1249789. Epub 2017 Jan 27.

本文引用的文献

1
When I say…response process validity evidence.
Med Educ. 2022 Sep;56(9):878-880. doi: 10.1111/medu.14853. Epub 2022 Jun 15.
2
Preparing and Presenting Validation Studies: A Guide for the Perplexed.
Simul Healthc. 2022 Dec 1;17(6):357-365. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000667. Epub 2022 Apr 24.
3
Qualitative Methods Used to Generate Questionnaire Items: A Systematic Review.
Qual Health Res. 2019 Jan;29(1):149-156. doi: 10.1177/1049732318783186. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
4
Interprofessional collaboration to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 22;6(6):CD000072. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000072.pub3.
5
Relationship of organizational culture, teamwork and job satisfaction in interprofessional teams.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Jun 23;15:243. doi: 10.1186/s12913-015-0888-y.
6
Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87.
Med Teach. 2014 Jun;36(6):463-74. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.889814. Epub 2014 Mar 24.
10
Nursing staff teamwork and job satisfaction.
J Nurs Manag. 2010 Nov;18(8):938-47. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2834.2010.01153.x. Epub 2010 Oct 4.

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