• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

一项关于标准化患者表现评定量表(学生版)的标准化、有效性和可靠性的研究。

A study on the standard setting, validity, and reliability of a standardized patient performance rating scale - student version.

机构信息

Department of Medical Education and Informatics, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey.

Department of Measurement and Evaluation, Ankara University Faculty of Education, Ankara, Turkey.

出版信息

Ann Med. 2023 Dec;55(1):490-501. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2168744.

DOI:10.1080/07853890.2023.2168744
PMID:36715166
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9888448/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The quality of the performances of standardized patients plays a significant role in the effectiveness of clinical skills education. Therefore, providing standardized patients with constant feedback is essential. It is especially important to get students' perspectives immediately following their encounters with standardized patients. In the literature, there is no scale for use by students to evaluate the performance of standardized patients. Thus, the three main goals of this study were to: (1) develop a scale for use by students to evaluate the performance of standardized patients, (2) examine the psychometric properties of the scale, and (3) determine a cut-off score for the scale in a standard-setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seven hundred and two medical students participated in the scale- development process, the pilot test, and the validation process, and seven educators took part in the standard-setting process. After the evaluation of content validity, construct validity was assessed via exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. For the standard-setting study, the extended Angoff method was used.

RESULTS

The exploratory factor analysis revealed that the scale had a single-factor structure, which was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis. The Cronbach's alpha internal consistency coefficient was 0.91. The scale consists of nine items. The cut-off score was determined to be 24.11/45, which represents the minimum acceptable standard for standardized patient performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study outlined the critical steps in developing a measurement tool and produced a valid and reliable scale that allows medical students to assess the performance of standardized patients immediately following their interaction with the standardized patient. This scale constitutes an important contribution to the literature as it provides a tool for standardized patient trainers to assess standardized patients' weaknesses and help them improve their performance.KEY MESSAGESEvaluation of SP performance is essential to ensure the educational quality of clinical skills training programs.Students are the most relevant stakeholders to give feedback about SP performance immediately after encounters.The 'Standardized Patient Performance Rating Scale - Student Version' is a valid, reliable scale that can be used by students for the evaluation of standardized patients' strengths and weaknesses at individual-performance levels quickly.

摘要

简介

标准化患者的表现质量对临床技能教育的效果起着重要作用。因此,为标准化患者提供持续的反馈至关重要。尤其重要的是,在学生与标准化患者接触后立即获得他们的反馈。在文献中,没有学生用于评估标准化患者表现的量表。因此,本研究的三个主要目标是:(1)开发学生用于评估标准化患者表现的量表,(2)检验量表的心理测量学特性,(3)在标准设定中确定量表的截止分数。

材料与方法

702 名医学生参与了量表开发过程、试点测试和验证过程,7 名教育工作者参与了标准设定过程。在内容效度评估后,通过探索性和验证性因素分析评估结构效度。对于标准设定研究,使用扩展的 Angoff 方法。

结果

探索性因素分析显示,该量表具有单因素结构,验证性因素分析也证实了这一点。Cronbach's alpha 内部一致性系数为 0.91。该量表由 9 个项目组成。截点分数确定为 24.11/45,代表标准化患者表现的最低可接受标准。

结论

我们的研究概述了开发测量工具的关键步骤,并生成了一个有效且可靠的量表,使医学生能够在与标准化患者互动后立即评估标准化患者的表现。该量表为文献做出了重要贡献,因为它为标准化患者培训师提供了一种工具,以评估标准化患者的弱点并帮助他们提高表现。

关键信息

评估 SP 表现对于确保临床技能培训计划的教育质量至关重要。

学生是在与 SP 接触后立即提供反馈的最相关利益相关者。

“标准化患者表现评定量表-学生版”是一个有效、可靠的量表,学生可以快速地对标准化患者的优势和劣势进行个体表现水平的评估。

相似文献

1
A study on the standard setting, validity, and reliability of a standardized patient performance rating scale - student version.一项关于标准化患者表现评定量表(学生版)的标准化、有效性和可靠性的研究。
Ann Med. 2023 Dec;55(1):490-501. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2168744.
2
A Student Assessment Tool for Standardized Patient Simulations (SAT-SPS): Psychometric analysis.标准化患者模拟学生评估工具(SAT-SPS):心理测量学分析。
Nurse Educ Today. 2018 May;64:79-84. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.02.005. Epub 2018 Feb 8.
3
A Psychometric Study of the Student Evidence-Based Practice Scale S-EBPQ-Arabic Version for Use among Undergraduate Nursing Students.基于学生的循证实践量表 S-EBPQ-阿拉伯文版在本科护生中应用的心理计量学研究。
Int J Clin Pract. 2024 Feb 13;2024:6375596. doi: 10.1155/2024/6375596. eCollection 2024.
4
Analysis of psychometric properties of the modified SETQ tool in undergraduate medical education.本科医学教育中改良版SETQ工具的心理测量特性分析
BMC Med Educ. 2017 Mar 16;17(1):56. doi: 10.1186/s12909-017-0893-4.
5
Development of an instrument to measure medical students' perceptions of the assessment environment: initial validation.一种用于测量医学生对评估环境认知的工具的开发:初步验证
Med Educ Online. 2015 Oct 27;20:28612. doi: 10.3402/meo.v20.28612. eCollection 2015.
6
Assessing medical students' skills in working with interpreters during patient encounters: a validation study of the Interpreter Scale.评估医学生在患者诊疗过程中与口译员合作的技能:口译员量表的效度研究
Acad Med. 2009 May;84(5):643-50. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31819faec8.
7
Developing a measurement tool for evaluating the hidden curriculum in nursing education.开发一种用于评估护理教育中隐性课程的测量工具。
Nurse Educ Today. 2021 Feb;97:104688. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104688. Epub 2020 Dec 3.
8
Evaluation the validity and reliability of the perceived medical school stress scale in Turkish medical students.评估感知医学生压力量表在土耳其医学生中的有效性和可靠性。
PLoS One. 2023 Aug 11;18(8):e0288769. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288769. eCollection 2023.
9
Let's ask the patient - composition and validation of a questionnaire for patients' feedback to medical students.让我们询问患者 - 为患者对医学生的反馈设计问卷的组成和验证。
BMC Med Educ. 2021 May 10;21(1):269. doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02683-y.
10
How to assess communication skills? Development of the rating scale ComOn Check.如何评估沟通技巧?ComOn Check 评分量表的制定。
Med Educ Online. 2017;22(1):1392823. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2017.1392823.

本文引用的文献

1
Empowering medical students as agents of curricular change: a value-added approach to student engagement in medical education.赋能医学生成为课程变革的推动者:以增值为导向的医学生参与医学教育。
Perspect Med Educ. 2020 Feb;9(1):60-65. doi: 10.1007/s40037-019-00547-2.
2
Twelve tips for running an effective session with standardized patients.与标准化病人有效互动的 12 个技巧。
Med Teach. 2020 Jun;42(6):622-627. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2019.1607969. Epub 2019 Apr 29.
3
Standardized patients in psychiatry - the best way to learn clinical skills?精神病学中的标准化病人——学习临床技能的最佳途径?
BMC Med Educ. 2018 Apr 6;18(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1184-4.
4
Engaging Learners to Advance Medical Education.激发学习者以推动医学教育发展。
Acad Med. 2017 Apr;92(4):437-440. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001602.
5
Exploratory factor analysis of the Oral Health Impact Profile.口腔健康影响程度量表的探索性因素分析
J Oral Rehabil. 2014 Sep;41(9):635-43. doi: 10.1111/joor.12192. Epub 2014 Jun 9.
6
Accuracy of portrayal by standardized patients: results from four OSCE stations conducted for high stakes examinations.标准化患者的描绘准确性:在四项高风险考试中进行的 OSCE 站的结果。
BMC Med Educ. 2014 May 19;14:97. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-14-97.
7
Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87.为教育研究编制问卷:医学教育促进与发展协会指南第87号
Med Teach. 2014 Jun;36(6):463-74. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.889814. Epub 2014 Mar 24.
8
The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE): AMEE Guide No. 81. Part I: an historical and theoretical perspective.客观结构化临床考试(OSCE):AMEE 指南第 81 号。第一部分:历史与理论视角。
Med Teach. 2013 Sep;35(9):e1437-46. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2013.818634.
9
Construction and validation of the Nijmegen Evaluation of the Simulated Patient (NESP): assessing simulated patients' ability to role-play and provide feedback to students.构建和验证模拟患者的奈梅亨评估(NESP):评估模拟患者角色扮演和为学生提供反馈的能力。
Acad Med. 2013 Feb;88(2):253-9. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31827c0856.
10
Key challenges in simulated patient programs: an international comparative case study.模拟患者项目中的关键挑战:一项国际比较案例研究。
BMC Med Educ. 2011 Sep 25;11:69. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-11-69.