急诊医学住院医师专业精神迷你评估练习的效度、信度和可接受性。

IF 0.9 Q3 MEDICAL ETHICS Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine Pub Date : 2019-10-15 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.18502/jmehm.v12i12.1641
Leila Amirhajlou, Ali Bidari, Fateme Alipour, Mehdi Yaseri, Samira Vaziri, Mahdi Rezai, Nader Tavakoli, Davood Farsi, Mohammad Reza Yasinzadeh, Reza Mosaddegh, Akram Hashemi
{"title":"急诊医学住院医师专业精神迷你评估练习的效度、信度和可接受性。","authors":"Leila Amirhajlou,&nbsp;Ali Bidari,&nbsp;Fateme Alipour,&nbsp;Mehdi Yaseri,&nbsp;Samira Vaziri,&nbsp;Mahdi Rezai,&nbsp;Nader Tavakoli,&nbsp;Davood Farsi,&nbsp;Mohammad Reza Yasinzadeh,&nbsp;Reza Mosaddegh,&nbsp;Akram Hashemi","doi":"10.18502/jmehm.v12i12.1641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Professionalism is a core competency in the medical profession. In this paper, we aimed to confirm the validity, reliability and acceptability of the Professionalism Mini-Evaluation Exercise (P-MEX) instrument for the emergency medicine (EM) residency program. Twenty-two EM attending physicians completed 383 P-MEX forms (the Persian version) for 90 EM residents. Construct validity was assessed via structural equation modeling (SEM). The reliability coefficient was estimated by the generalizability theory, and acceptability was assessed using two researcher-made questionnaires to evaluate the perspectives of residents and assessors. There was a consensus among the participants regarding the content of P-MEX. According to the results of SEM, the first implementation of the original model was associated with a moderate fit and high item loadings. The model modified with correlated error variances for two pairs of items showed an appropriate fit. The reliability of P-MEX was 0.81 for 14 occasions. The perception survey indicated high acceptability for P-MEX from the viewpoint of the residents and increasing satisfaction with P-MEX among the assessors over time. According to the results of the research, P-MEX is a reliable, valid, and acceptable instrument for assessing professionalism in EM residents.</p>","PeriodicalId":45276,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine","volume":"12 ","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7166245/pdf/","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity, reliability and acceptability of Professionalism Mini-Evaluation Exercise (P-MEX) for emergency medicine residency training.\",\"authors\":\"Leila Amirhajlou,&nbsp;Ali Bidari,&nbsp;Fateme Alipour,&nbsp;Mehdi Yaseri,&nbsp;Samira Vaziri,&nbsp;Mahdi Rezai,&nbsp;Nader Tavakoli,&nbsp;Davood Farsi,&nbsp;Mohammad Reza Yasinzadeh,&nbsp;Reza Mosaddegh,&nbsp;Akram Hashemi\",\"doi\":\"10.18502/jmehm.v12i12.1641\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Professionalism is a core competency in the medical profession. In this paper, we aimed to confirm the validity, reliability and acceptability of the Professionalism Mini-Evaluation Exercise (P-MEX) instrument for the emergency medicine (EM) residency program. Twenty-two EM attending physicians completed 383 P-MEX forms (the Persian version) for 90 EM residents. Construct validity was assessed via structural equation modeling (SEM). The reliability coefficient was estimated by the generalizability theory, and acceptability was assessed using two researcher-made questionnaires to evaluate the perspectives of residents and assessors. There was a consensus among the participants regarding the content of P-MEX. According to the results of SEM, the first implementation of the original model was associated with a moderate fit and high item loadings. The model modified with correlated error variances for two pairs of items showed an appropriate fit. The reliability of P-MEX was 0.81 for 14 occasions. The perception survey indicated high acceptability for P-MEX from the viewpoint of the residents and increasing satisfaction with P-MEX among the assessors over time. According to the results of the research, P-MEX is a reliable, valid, and acceptable instrument for assessing professionalism in EM residents.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45276,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7166245/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18502/jmehm.v12i12.1641\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jmehm.v12i12.1641","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

专业精神是医疗行业的核心竞争力。在本文中,我们旨在确认专业迷你评估练习(P-MEX)工具在急诊医学(EM)住院医师计划中的效度、信度和可接受性。22名急诊主治医生为90名急诊居民填写了383份P-MEX表格(波斯语版)。通过结构方程模型(SEM)评估结构效度。信度系数采用概化理论估计,可接受度采用两份自行制作的问卷评估居民和评估者的观点。与会者对P-MEX的内容达成了共识。根据扫描电镜的结果,原始模型的第一次实施与中等拟合和高项目负荷相关。对两对项目进行相关误差方差修正后的模型拟合较好。14次P-MEX的信度为0.81。感知调查显示,从居民的角度来看,P-MEX的可接受性很高,随着时间的推移,评估者对P-MEX的满意度也在增加。根据研究结果,P-MEX是评估新兴市场居民专业精神的可靠、有效和可接受的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Validity, reliability and acceptability of Professionalism Mini-Evaluation Exercise (P-MEX) for emergency medicine residency training.

Professionalism is a core competency in the medical profession. In this paper, we aimed to confirm the validity, reliability and acceptability of the Professionalism Mini-Evaluation Exercise (P-MEX) instrument for the emergency medicine (EM) residency program. Twenty-two EM attending physicians completed 383 P-MEX forms (the Persian version) for 90 EM residents. Construct validity was assessed via structural equation modeling (SEM). The reliability coefficient was estimated by the generalizability theory, and acceptability was assessed using two researcher-made questionnaires to evaluate the perspectives of residents and assessors. There was a consensus among the participants regarding the content of P-MEX. According to the results of SEM, the first implementation of the original model was associated with a moderate fit and high item loadings. The model modified with correlated error variances for two pairs of items showed an appropriate fit. The reliability of P-MEX was 0.81 for 14 occasions. The perception survey indicated high acceptability for P-MEX from the viewpoint of the residents and increasing satisfaction with P-MEX among the assessors over time. According to the results of the research, P-MEX is a reliable, valid, and acceptable instrument for assessing professionalism in EM residents.

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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
23 weeks
期刊最新文献
Navigating ethical dilemmas in complementary and alternative medicine: a narrative review. The criterion of human dignity in the Quran. How can physicians' professional reputation be damaged? Patients', nurses' and physicians' viewpoints. Ethical issues experienced by otolaryngologists: a conventional content analysis. Evaluation of medical sciences students' awareness of the patients' rights charter: a cross-sectional study.
×
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