در هنگام جستجو کلمه در قسمت عنوان میتوانید کلمات مورد جستجو را با کاراکتر (-) جدا کنید.
کاربرد نوع شرط:
- جایگاه : پژوهشی
- مجله: Journal of Advances in Medical Education and Professionalism
- نوع مقاله: Journal Article
- کلمات کلیدی: Questionnaire,Factor analysis,Medical students,reliability,Skills
- چکیده:
- چکیده انگلیسی: Introduction: Bedside teaching plays a crucial role in acquiring essential clinical skills. Therefore, the main aim of this study is assessing the validity and reliability of the Persian version of German bedside teaching (BST) instrument. This instrument was specially developed for evaluation of bedside teaching.
Methods: The present cross-sectional study was conducted on 150 last year medical students, using convenience sampling. The Persian version of the bedside teaching (BST) was used for data
gathering. To calculate the reliability of the questions, Cronbach’s alpha was used and to determine the construct validity of the questionnaire, confirmatory factor analysis was used. All analyses
were performed in LISREL 10 and SPSS 21 software.
Results: Cronbach’s alpha indicated excellent reliability for each subscale (α=0.77–0.85). All of the value of the questions are more than a significant number of 1.96 and concluded to be significant. There was an acceptable fit between the hypothetical model and the data and all comparative fit indices (CFI, NFI, RFI, IFI) showed good model fitness. BST is a valid and reliable instrument for the assessment of clinical teaching at bedside. It has 18 items with 5 point Likert scales.
Conclusion: The findings suggest that the Persian version of the BST questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for the evaluation of teachers and providing feedback in a clinical setting. However,
more studies should be conducted in other cities in Iran.- انتشار مقاله: 30-04-1399
- نویسندگان: MOHAMMAD SAEED GHARAATI JAHROMI,MITRA AMINI,MAHSA MOOSAVI,ALIREZA SALEHI,SOMAYEH DELAVARI,ALI ASGHAR HAYAT,PARISA NABEIEI
- مشاهده
- جایگاه : پژوهشی
- مجله: Journal of Advances in Medical Education and Professionalism
- نوع مقاله: Journal Article
- کلمات کلیدی: Medical students,Education,Medical assessment
- چکیده:
- چکیده انگلیسی: Introduction: Clinical reasoning as a critical and high level of clinical competency should be acquired during medical education, and medical educators should attempt to assess this ability in medical students. Nowadays, there are several ways to evaluate medical students’ clinical reasoning ability in different countries worldwide. There are some well-known clinical reasoning tests such as Key Feature (KF), Clinical Reasoning Problem (CRP), Script Concordance Test (SCT), and Comprehensive Integrative Puzzle (CIP). Each of these tests has its advantages and disadvantages. In this study, we evaluated the reliability of combination of clinical reasoning tests SCT, KF, CIP, and CRP in one national exam and the correlation between the subtest scores of these tests together with the total score of the exam.
Methods: A total of 339 high ranked medical students from 60 medical schools in Iran participated in a national exam named “Medical Olympiad”. The ninth Medical Olympiad was held in Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, under the direct supervision of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education in summer 2017. The expert group designed a combination of four types of clinical reasoning tests to assess both analytical and non-analytical clinical reasoning. Mean scores of SCT, CRP, KF, and CIP were measured using descriptive statistics. Reliability was calculated for each test and the combination of tests using Cronbach’s alpha. Spearman’s correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between the score of each subtest and the total score. SPSS version 21 was used for data analysis and the level of significance was considered <0.05.
Results: The reliability of the combination of tests was 0.815. The reliability of KF was 0.81 and 0.76, 0.80, and 0.92 for SCT, CRP, and CIP, respectively. The mean total score was 169.921±41.54 from 240. All correlations between each clinical reasoning test and total score were significant (P<0.001). The highest correlation (0.887) was seen between CIP score and total score.
Conclusion: The study showed that combining different clinical reasoning tests can be a reliable way of measuring this ability.- انتشار مقاله: 14-02-1398
- نویسندگان: ANAHITA SADEGHI,ALI ALI ASGARI,NEZARALI MOULAEI,VAHID MOHAMMADKARIMI,SOMAYEH DELAVARI,MITRA AMINI,SETAREH NASIRI,ROGHAYEH AKBARI,MOJGAN SANJARI,IRAJ SEDIGHI,PARISA KHOSHNEVISASL,MANOUCHEHR KHOSHBATEN,SAEED SAFARI,LEILY MOHAJERZADEH,PARISA NABEIEI,BERNARD CHARLIN
- مشاهده
- جایگاه : پژوهشی
- مجله: Journal of Advances in Medical Education and Professionalism
- نوع مقاله: Journal Article
- کلمات کلیدی:
- چکیده:
- چکیده انگلیسی: Introduction: Efficiency evaluation of universities and facultiesis one of the tools that help managers to identify the departments’strengths and weakness. The main objective of the presentresearch was to measure and compare the technical efficiency ofShiraz school of medicine departments using Data EnvelopmentAnalysis (DEA) technique.Methods: This cross-sectional and retrospective study wasperformed on clinical and non-clinical departments in researchand education domains over the period of 2006 to 2011. Differentinputs and outputs were considered for research and educationaldomain separately. Efficiency was measured based on theobserved optimal performance.Results: Findings showed that pathology and anatomydepartments achieved the score of 100 in technical efficiency ineducation during 2006 to 2011. During this period, parasitology,psychiatric and pediatrics department’s achieved the score of100 for technical efficiency in research domain. The lowestmean of relative educational efficiency belonged to orthopedicdepartment; as to relative research efficiency, the lowest meanwas shown in orthopedics and genetics departments. The meantechnical efficiency of non-medical departments in education andresearch domain was 91.93 and 76.08, respectively, while the meantechnical efficiency of the clinical department in educational andresearch fields was 91.02 and 82.23, respectively.Conclusion: Using multiple input and output in DEA techniqueprovided a comprehensive evaluation of efficiency in Shiraz schoolof medicine departments. The DEA could successfully estimatethe technical efficiency of the departments in research andeducational fields. Moreover, the deficiency in each departmentwas found; this could help them to plan for improvement.Keywords: Education; Medical school; Efficiency; Resource allocation
- انتشار مقاله: 07-10-1394
- نویسندگان: SOMAYEH DELAVARI,RITA REZAEE,NAHID HATAM,SAJAD DELAVARI
- مشاهده