医学教育管理 ›› 2026, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (4): 561-570.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-045X.2026.04.019

• 调查研究 • 上一篇    

职业卫生与职业医学实践教学产教融合质量评价指标体系构建

  

  1. 天津医科大学公共卫生学院,天津 300070
  • 收稿日期:2025-10-20 修回日期:2025-11-18 出版日期:2026-08-20 发布日期:2026-09-01

Construction of a quality evaluation index system for the integration of industry and education in occupational health and occupational medicine practical teaching

  1. Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin 300070, China
  • Received:2025-10-20 Revised:2025-11-18 Online:2026-08-20 Published:2026-09-01

摘要: 目的 构建职业卫生与职业医学实践教学产教融合质量评价指标体系,为职业卫生与职业医学的实践教学改革提供可量化、可操作的评估工具。方法 采用德尔菲法进行两轮专家函询,确定了包含6项一级指标、17项二级指标和38项三级指标在内的指标体系。结果 两轮问卷均达到了100.0%的有效回收率,专家权威系数分别为0.83和0.82,高于0.7,专家回答问卷的积极程度较高,研究结果较为可信,两轮问卷咨询后专家达成一致意见,最终形成包括6个维度38个三级指标的职业卫生与职业医学实践教学产教融合质量评价指标体系。结论 评价指标体系在一定程度上弥补了职业卫生与职业医学实践教学改革与评价研究的不足,为完善该课程实践教学培养方案提供参考依据,同时也为预防医学专业推进产教融合、优化实践教学体系提供可借鉴的方法论与评估框架。

Abstract:

Objective To construct a quality evaluation index system for the integration of industry and education in occupational health and occupational medicine practical teaching, providing a quantifiable and operable assessment tool for the practical teaching reform of occupational health and occupational medicine. Methods Two rounds of expert correspondence were conducted using the Delphi method, establishing an index system comprising 6 first-level indicators, 17 second-level indicators, and 38 third-level indicators. Results Both rounds of questionnaires achieved a 100.0% effective response rate. The expert authority coefficients were 0.83 and 0.82, respectively, both exceeding 0.7, indicating a high level of expert engagement in responding to the questionnaires and making the research results relatively credible. After two rounds of questionnaire consultations, experts reached a consensus, ultimately forming a quality evaluation index system for the integration of industry and education in occupational health and occupational medicine practical teaching, comprising 6 dimensions and 38 third-level indicators. Conclusion The evaluation index system fills a current gap in the practical teaching reform and evaluation research of occupational health and occupational medicine, providing a reference for improving the practical teaching training program of this course. At the same time, it also provides a methodological and evaluative framework for the specialty of preventive medicine to promote the integration of industry and education and to optimize the practical teaching system.