验证面向医护人员的新型神经学评估测试。

Brittany R Doyle, Jane R von Gaudecker, Asmiet K Techan, Emerson B Nairon, DaiWai M Olson
{"title":"验证面向医护人员的新型神经学评估测试。","authors":"Brittany R Doyle, Jane R von Gaudecker, Asmiet K Techan, Emerson B Nairon, DaiWai M Olson","doi":"10.1097/JNN.0000000000000754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>BACKGROUND: To measure the effectiveness of an educational intervention, it is essential to develop high-quality, validated tools to assess a change in knowledge or skills after an intervention. An identified gap within the field of neurology is the lack of a universal test to examine knowledge of neurological assessment. METHODS: This instrument development study was designed to determine whether neuroscience knowledge as demonstrated in a Neurologic Assessment Test (NAT) was normally distributed across healthcare professionals who treat patients with neurologic illness. The variables of time, knowledge, accuracy, and confidence were individually explored and analyzed in SAS. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) time spent by 135 participants to complete the NAT was 12.9 (3.2) minutes. The mean knowledge score was 39.5 (18.2), mean accuracy was 46.0 (15.7), and mean confidence was 84.4 (24.4). Despite comparatively small standard deviations, Shapiro-Wilk scores indicate that the time spent, knowledge, accuracy, and confidence are nonnormally distributed ( P < .0001). The Cronbach α was 0.7816 considering all 3 measures (knowledge, accuracy, and confidence); this improved to an α of 0.8943 when only knowledge and accuracy were included in the model. The amount of time spent was positively associated with higher accuracy ( r2 = 0.04, P < .05), higher knowledge was positively associated with higher accuracy ( r2 = 0.6543, P < .0001), and higher knowledge was positively associated with higher confidence ( r2 = 0.4348, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The scores for knowledge, confidence, and accuracy each had a slightly skewed distribution around a point estimate with a standard deviation smaller than the mean. This suggests initial content validity in the NAT. There is adequate initial construct validity to support using the NAT as an outcome measure for projects that measure change in knowledge. Although improvements can be made, the NAT does have adequate construct and content validity for initial use.</p>","PeriodicalId":94240,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses","volume":" ","pages":"86-91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of a Novel Neurologic Assessment Test for Healthcare Staff.\",\"authors\":\"Brittany R Doyle, Jane R von Gaudecker, Asmiet K Techan, Emerson B Nairon, DaiWai M Olson\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JNN.0000000000000754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>BACKGROUND: To measure the effectiveness of an educational intervention, it is essential to develop high-quality, validated tools to assess a change in knowledge or skills after an intervention. An identified gap within the field of neurology is the lack of a universal test to examine knowledge of neurological assessment. METHODS: This instrument development study was designed to determine whether neuroscience knowledge as demonstrated in a Neurologic Assessment Test (NAT) was normally distributed across healthcare professionals who treat patients with neurologic illness. The variables of time, knowledge, accuracy, and confidence were individually explored and analyzed in SAS. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) time spent by 135 participants to complete the NAT was 12.9 (3.2) minutes. The mean knowledge score was 39.5 (18.2), mean accuracy was 46.0 (15.7), and mean confidence was 84.4 (24.4). Despite comparatively small standard deviations, Shapiro-Wilk scores indicate that the time spent, knowledge, accuracy, and confidence are nonnormally distributed ( P < .0001). The Cronbach α was 0.7816 considering all 3 measures (knowledge, accuracy, and confidence); this improved to an α of 0.8943 when only knowledge and accuracy were included in the model. The amount of time spent was positively associated with higher accuracy ( r2 = 0.04, P < .05), higher knowledge was positively associated with higher accuracy ( r2 = 0.6543, P < .0001), and higher knowledge was positively associated with higher confidence ( r2 = 0.4348, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The scores for knowledge, confidence, and accuracy each had a slightly skewed distribution around a point estimate with a standard deviation smaller than the mean. This suggests initial content validity in the NAT. There is adequate initial construct validity to support using the NAT as an outcome measure for projects that measure change in knowledge. Although improvements can be made, the NAT does have adequate construct and content validity for initial use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"86-91\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JNN.0000000000000754\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of neuroscience nursing : journal of the American Association of Neuroscience Nurses","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JNN.0000000000000754","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:背景:为了衡量教育干预措施的有效性,必须开发高质量、经过验证的工具来评估干预措施后知识或技能的变化。在神经病学领域已发现的一个缺陷是缺乏一种通用测试来检查神经病学评估知识。方法:该工具开发研究旨在确定神经评估测试(NAT)中所展示的神经科学知识在治疗神经系统疾病患者的医护人员中是否呈正态分布。在 SAS 中对时间、知识、准确性和信心等变量进行了单独探讨和分析。结果:135 名参与者完成 NAT 所花费的平均时间(标准差)为 12.9 (3.2) 分钟。平均知识分数为 39.5 (18.2),平均准确分数为 46.0 (15.7),平均信心分数为 84.4 (24.4)。尽管标准偏差相对较小,但 Shapiro-Wilk 分数表明,所花费的时间、知识、准确性和信心均呈非正态分布(P < .0001)。考虑到所有三个测量指标(知识、准确性和信心),Cronbach α 为 0.7816;当模型中只包括知识和准确性时,α 提高到 0.8943。花费的时间与较高的准确度呈正相关(r2 = 0.04,P < .05),较高的知识与较高的准确度呈正相关(r2 = 0.6543,P < .0001),较高的知识与较高的信心呈正相关(r2 = 0.4348,P < .0001)。结论:知识、信心和准确性的得分均围绕一个估计点略有倾斜分布,标准偏差小于平均值。这表明 NAT 具有初步的内容效度。NAT 具有足够的初步结构效度,支持将其作为衡量知识变化项目的结果测量指标。尽管还可以进行改进,但 NAT 在初始使用时确实具有足够的构造和内容效度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Validation of a Novel Neurologic Assessment Test for Healthcare Staff.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: To measure the effectiveness of an educational intervention, it is essential to develop high-quality, validated tools to assess a change in knowledge or skills after an intervention. An identified gap within the field of neurology is the lack of a universal test to examine knowledge of neurological assessment. METHODS: This instrument development study was designed to determine whether neuroscience knowledge as demonstrated in a Neurologic Assessment Test (NAT) was normally distributed across healthcare professionals who treat patients with neurologic illness. The variables of time, knowledge, accuracy, and confidence were individually explored and analyzed in SAS. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) time spent by 135 participants to complete the NAT was 12.9 (3.2) minutes. The mean knowledge score was 39.5 (18.2), mean accuracy was 46.0 (15.7), and mean confidence was 84.4 (24.4). Despite comparatively small standard deviations, Shapiro-Wilk scores indicate that the time spent, knowledge, accuracy, and confidence are nonnormally distributed ( P < .0001). The Cronbach α was 0.7816 considering all 3 measures (knowledge, accuracy, and confidence); this improved to an α of 0.8943 when only knowledge and accuracy were included in the model. The amount of time spent was positively associated with higher accuracy ( r2 = 0.04, P < .05), higher knowledge was positively associated with higher accuracy ( r2 = 0.6543, P < .0001), and higher knowledge was positively associated with higher confidence ( r2 = 0.4348, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The scores for knowledge, confidence, and accuracy each had a slightly skewed distribution around a point estimate with a standard deviation smaller than the mean. This suggests initial content validity in the NAT. There is adequate initial construct validity to support using the NAT as an outcome measure for projects that measure change in knowledge. Although improvements can be made, the NAT does have adequate construct and content validity for initial use.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Implementation of a Nurse-Initiated Protocol to Improve Enteral Medication Administration Documentation in Stroke Patients. Methods for Developing Neuroscience Nursing Clinical Practice Guidelines. Development of an Acute Stroke Care Seeking Framework. Exploring Perspectives on Stroke Standard Set Data Collection: A Qualitative Descriptive Study. Measures and Influencers of Reintegration for the Stroke Patient: A Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1