A Comparative, Individual Values-Based Scoring Approach to the Secure Flourish Index Among Clinical Health Professions Students.

IF 1.9 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES

Medical Science Educator Pub Date : 2024-11-07 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1007/s40670-024-02182-x

Stephanie Neary, Benjamin Doolittle, Martina Mueller, Michelle Nichols

{"title":"A Comparative, Individual Values-Based Scoring Approach to the Secure Flourish Index Among Clinical Health Professions Students.","authors":"Stephanie Neary, Benjamin Doolittle, Martina Mueller, Michelle Nichols","doi":"10.1007/s40670-024-02182-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate flourishing among medical (MD), physician assistant (PA), and nurse practitioner (NP) students, using the novel Secure Flourish Index (SFI).Method: MD, PA, and NP students from two institutions completed the traditional SFI (tSFI), then applied a percentage weight to each of the six domains (maximum total 100%) based on perceived relative importance to their overall flourishing, creating a novel self-weighted SFI score (swSFI). The Bland-Altman (BA) plot was used to assess the magnitude of agreement between scores.Results: The BA plot (n = 281) revealed a mean bias of .07(95% CI -.50,.63). Eighteen participants (6.4%) fell outside of the calculated BA limits of agreement [-9.31 [95% CI - 10.27,-8.45] and 9.45 [95% CI 8.49,10.41]]. Linear regression revealed the mean BA score is predictive of the mean difference between scores [R2 = 0.07, F(1,280) = 21.1, p < .001] indicating bias in agreement between the scoring systems as mean flourishing score changes.Conclusion: Accounting for individual values is important when measuring student flourishing but is missing from current operant definitions. The overall mean difference (bias) in tSFI and swSFI scores is minimal (.07, possible range 0-120). However, the bias becomes larger as individual mean flourishing scores move towards both the high and low ends of the flourishing spectrum. This indicates that the influence of weighting flourishing domains is larger for individuals with high or low flourishing than those with moderate flourishing.Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02182-x.","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"35 1","pages":"281-291"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11933579/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Science Educator","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-024-02182-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate flourishing among medical (MD), physician assistant (PA), and nurse practitioner (NP) students, using the novel Secure Flourish Index (SFI).

Method: MD, PA, and NP students from two institutions completed the traditional SFI (tSFI), then applied a percentage weight to each of the six domains (maximum total 100%) based on perceived relative importance to their overall flourishing, creating a novel self-weighted SFI score (swSFI). The Bland-Altman (BA) plot was used to assess the magnitude of agreement between scores.

Results: The BA plot (n = 281) revealed a mean bias of .07(95% CI -.50,.63). Eighteen participants (6.4%) fell outside of the calculated BA limits of agreement [-9.31 [95% CI - 10.27,-8.45] and 9.45 [95% CI 8.49,10.41]]. Linear regression revealed the mean BA score is predictive of the mean difference between scores [R² = 0.07, F(1,280) = 21.1, p < .001] indicating bias in agreement between the scoring systems as mean flourishing score changes.

Conclusion: Accounting for individual values is important when measuring student flourishing but is missing from current operant definitions. The overall mean difference (bias) in tSFI and swSFI scores is minimal (.07, possible range 0-120). However, the bias becomes larger as individual mean flourishing scores move towards both the high and low ends of the flourishing spectrum. This indicates that the influence of weighting flourishing domains is larger for individuals with high or low flourishing than those with moderate flourishing.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02182-x.

查看原文本刊更多论文

临床卫生专业学生安全繁荣指数的比较、基于个体价值的评分方法。

目的：本研究的目的是调查医学（MD），医师助理（PA）和护士执业（NP）学生的繁荣，采用新的安全繁荣指数（SFI）。方法：来自两所大学的MD、PA和NP学生完成了传统的SFI (tSFI)，然后根据对他们整体繁荣的感知相对重要性对六个领域中的每一个应用百分比权重（最大总数100%），创建一个新的自我加权SFI分数（swSFI）。Bland-Altman （BA）图用于评估得分之间的一致性程度。结果：BA图（n = 281）显示平均偏倚为0.07 （95% CI - 0.50, 0.63）。18名参与者（6.4%）超出了计算的BA一致限度[-9.31 [95% CI - 10.27,-8.45]和9.45 [95% CI 8.49,10.41]]。线性回归显示，平均BA分数可以预测分数之间的平均差异[R2 = 0.07， F(1,280) = 21.1, p]。结论：在衡量学生繁荣时，考虑个人价值是重要的，但在当前的操作性定义中缺失。tSFI和swSFI评分的总体平均差异（偏差）最小。07，可能范围0-120)。然而，随着个体平均繁荣分数向繁荣光谱的高端和低端移动，这种偏差会变得更大。这表明加权繁荣域对高繁荣和低繁荣个体的影响大于中等繁荣个体。补充资料：在线版本提供补充资料，网址为10.1007/s40670-024-02182-x。

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

Medical Science Educator Social Sciences-Education

CiteScore

2.90

自引率

11.80%

发文量

202

期刊介绍： Medical Science Educator is the successor of the journal JIAMSE. It is the peer-reviewed publication of the International Association of Medical Science Educators (IAMSE). The Journal offers all who teach in healthcare the most current information to succeed in their task by publishing scholarly activities, opinions, and resources in medical science education. Published articles focus on teaching the sciences fundamental to modern medicine and health, and include basic science education, clinical teaching, and the use of modern education technologies. The Journal provides the readership a better understanding of teaching and learning techniques in order to advance medical science education.