医学教育管理 ›› 2019, Vol. 5 ›› Issue (5): 449-454.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-045X.2019.05.014

• 毕业后教育 • 上一篇    下一篇

全科医学规范化培训应诊能力评价指标体系探索

王美荣 1 ,杜娟 1 ,刘英杰 2 ,徐筱婧媛 1 ,陈小垒 1 ,葛彩英 1, 3   

  1. 1. 首都医科大学全科医学与继续教育学院,北京 100069;2. 朝阳区崔各庄第二社区卫生服务中心,北京100053;3. 丰台区方庄社区卫生服务中心全科门诊,北京 100078
  • 收稿日期:2019-06-10 出版日期:2019-10-20 发布日期:2019-12-27
  • 通讯作者: 葛彩英
  • 基金资助:
    北京市教育委员会首都全科医学研究专项(16QK01)

Evaluation index system construction of consultation competence in standardized training of general practitioners

Wang Meirong 1 , Du Juan 1 , Liu Yingjie 2 , Xu Xiaojingyuan 1 , Chen Xiaolei 1 , Ge Caiying 1, 3   

  1. 1. School of General Practice and Continuing Education, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100069, China;2. The Second Community Health Service Center of Cuigezhuang, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100053, China;3. Department of General Practice, Fangzhuang Community Health Service Center, Fengtai District, Beijing 100078, China
  • Received:2019-06-10 Online:2019-10-20 Published:2019-12-27

摘要: 目的 对课题组开发的《全科医学规范化培训学员全科医疗应诊能力评价指标体系》的效度进行评价评。方法 2017 年 11 月- 2018 年 5 月,选择第三年的全科医学规范化培训学员 31 人,对该评价指标体系进行效度分析评价。 结果 评价指标体系各条目与所属维度、各维度与指标体系总体之间均有显著性相关,提取出特征根大于 1 的 4 个因子,累积贡献率为 57.47%,4 个因子所有条目的负荷值均在 0.4 以上。结论 研究通过对效度的初步评价,表明该指标体系的效度较高,但样本量、分者评分方式较为有限,使得调查结果存在一定局限。因此,应以此为出发点,进行深入的研究,以寻求科学、合理的验证方法。

Abstract: Objective To evaluate the validity of the evaluation index system for the consultation competence in standardized training of general practitioners (GPs). Methods The validity of evaluation index system was evaluated on 31 GPs receiving the third year of standardized training from November 2017 to May 2018. Results There was remarkable correlation between each item and its dimension, also each dimension and overall scale. Extracted four factors, the characteristic roots of which were greater than1, the cumulative contribution rate of which was 57.47% and the load values of all entries from the four factors were above 0.4. Conclusion The results indicated the evaluation index system for the consultation competence in standardized training of GPs had desirable validity. However, the results have its limitations due to the limited sample size and scoring method. Therefore, further research should be conducted to seek more scientific and reasonable evaluation methods based on these.