A Delphi Study to Validate the Patient-Centered Doctor’s Competency Framework in Korea

S. Im, Youngjon Kim, Chanwoong Kim, G. Lee, Sun-Woo Lee, W. Jeon, Hanna Jung, So-Joung Yune
{"title":"A Delphi Study to Validate the Patient-Centered Doctor’s Competency Framework in Korea","authors":"S. Im, Youngjon Kim, Chanwoong Kim, G. Lee, Sun-Woo Lee, W. Jeon, Hanna Jung, So-Joung Yune","doi":"10.17496/kmer.23.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Defining a competent doctor is important for educating and training doctors. However, competency frameworks have rarely been validated during the process of their development in Korea. The purpose of this study was to validate the patient-centered doctor’s competency framework, which had been developed by our expert working group (EWG). Two rounds of Delphi questionnaire surveys were conducted among a panel of experts on medicine and medical education. The panel members were provided with six core competencies, 17 sub-competencies, and 53 enabling competencies, and were asked to rate the importance of these competencies on a 5-point Likert scale. Between April and July 2021, a total of 28 experts completed both rounds. The data of the Delphi study were analyzed for the mean, standard deviation, median, inter-rater agreement (IRA), and content validity ratio (CVR). A CVR >0.36 and IRA ≥0.75 were deemed to indicate validity and agreement. This study found that five enabling competencies were not valid, and agreement was not reached for three sub-competencies and two enabling competencies. In consideration of CVR and the individual opinions of panel members at each session, the final competencies were extracted through consensus meetings of the EWG. The competencies were modified into six core competencies, 16 sub-competencies, and 47 enabling competencies. This study is meaningful in that it proposes patient-centered doctor’s competencies enabling the development of residents’ milestone competencies, an assessment system, and educational programs.","PeriodicalId":200174,"journal":{"name":"Korean Medical Education Review","volume":"24 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Medical Education Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17496/kmer.23.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Defining a competent doctor is important for educating and training doctors. However, competency frameworks have rarely been validated during the process of their development in Korea. The purpose of this study was to validate the patient-centered doctor’s competency framework, which had been developed by our expert working group (EWG). Two rounds of Delphi questionnaire surveys were conducted among a panel of experts on medicine and medical education. The panel members were provided with six core competencies, 17 sub-competencies, and 53 enabling competencies, and were asked to rate the importance of these competencies on a 5-point Likert scale. Between April and July 2021, a total of 28 experts completed both rounds. The data of the Delphi study were analyzed for the mean, standard deviation, median, inter-rater agreement (IRA), and content validity ratio (CVR). A CVR >0.36 and IRA ≥0.75 were deemed to indicate validity and agreement. This study found that five enabling competencies were not valid, and agreement was not reached for three sub-competencies and two enabling competencies. In consideration of CVR and the individual opinions of panel members at each session, the final competencies were extracted through consensus meetings of the EWG. The competencies were modified into six core competencies, 16 sub-competencies, and 47 enabling competencies. This study is meaningful in that it proposes patient-centered doctor’s competencies enabling the development of residents’ milestone competencies, an assessment system, and educational programs.
验证韩国以病人为中心的医生胜任力框架的德尔菲研究
定义一个称职的医生对医生的教育和培训很重要。然而,胜任力框架在韩国的发展过程中很少得到验证。本研究的目的是验证我们的专家工作组(EWG)开发的以患者为中心的医生胜任力框架。在医学和医学教育专家小组中进行了两轮德尔菲问卷调查。小组成员被提供了6个核心能力,17个子能力和53个使能能力,并被要求在5分李克特量表上对这些能力的重要性进行评级。在2021年4月至7月期间,共有28名专家完成了这两轮测试。对德尔菲研究的数据进行均值、标准差、中位数、评分者间一致性(IRA)和内容效度比(CVR)的分析。CVR值为0.36,IRA值≥0.75,表明研究的有效性和一致性。本研究发现,5个使能胜任力不有效,3个子胜任力和2个使能胜任力未达成一致。考虑到CVR和每届会议小组成员的个人意见,最终的胜任能力是通过工作组的协商一致会议得出的。这些能力被修改为6个核心能力、16个子能力和47个使能能力。本研究提出以病人为中心的医师胜任力,以促进住院医师里程碑式胜任力的发展、评估系统及教育计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信