Honghe Li, David A Hirsh, Xinzhi Song, Edward Krupat, Xue Yang, Ming-Jung Ho, Dianne Manning, Deliang Wen
{"title":"East Meets West: A Multisite Validity Study of the China Medical Professionalism Inventory.","authors":"Honghe Li, David A Hirsh, Xinzhi Song, Edward Krupat, Xue Yang, Ming-Jung Ho, Dianne Manning, Deliang Wen","doi":"10.5334/pme.1682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The characteristics of medical professionalism (MP) vary across cultural contexts. Professionalism constructs and MP tools currently rely on Western cultural perspectives. Chinese leaders are calling for MP tools that connect to historical traditions, current culture, and modern conceptualizations of MP inside and outside China.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors developed the China Medical Professionalism Inventory using standard processes in two steps. Phase I, \"development of item pool,\" involved reviewing the literature to generate an item pool and conducting a first survey of Chinese clinical experts to develop content evidence. Phase II, \"delineation of validity evidence,\" included three psychometric studies of practicing physicians and a second expert survey to create the final version of the tool; these processes aimed to determine validity evidence for content, internal structure, and relationships to other variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Systematic review of the English- and Chinese-language literature identified 1537 professionalism-specific items from 63 sources to form the item pool. The authors conducted two rounds of expert review, including surveying nationally prominent Chinese clinician-leaders (n = 34, response rate 85%, and n = 76, response rate 63%). The authors conducted three psychometric studies of practicing Chinese physicians (n = 360, response rate 92%; n = 3653, response rate 90%; and n = 955, response rate 95%). The results generated the 20-item CMPI, with four factors: \"Respect, Compassion, and Communication; Integrity; Excellence; and Responsibility.\"</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The CMPI presented validity evidence for content, internal structure, and relationship to other variables. This study may extend the conceptualization and reach of MP measurement.</p>","PeriodicalId":48532,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Medical Education","volume":"14 1","pages":"603-618"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12466328/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.1682","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: The characteristics of medical professionalism (MP) vary across cultural contexts. Professionalism constructs and MP tools currently rely on Western cultural perspectives. Chinese leaders are calling for MP tools that connect to historical traditions, current culture, and modern conceptualizations of MP inside and outside China.
Methods: The authors developed the China Medical Professionalism Inventory using standard processes in two steps. Phase I, "development of item pool," involved reviewing the literature to generate an item pool and conducting a first survey of Chinese clinical experts to develop content evidence. Phase II, "delineation of validity evidence," included three psychometric studies of practicing physicians and a second expert survey to create the final version of the tool; these processes aimed to determine validity evidence for content, internal structure, and relationships to other variables.
Results: Systematic review of the English- and Chinese-language literature identified 1537 professionalism-specific items from 63 sources to form the item pool. The authors conducted two rounds of expert review, including surveying nationally prominent Chinese clinician-leaders (n = 34, response rate 85%, and n = 76, response rate 63%). The authors conducted three psychometric studies of practicing Chinese physicians (n = 360, response rate 92%; n = 3653, response rate 90%; and n = 955, response rate 95%). The results generated the 20-item CMPI, with four factors: "Respect, Compassion, and Communication; Integrity; Excellence; and Responsibility."
Discussion: The CMPI presented validity evidence for content, internal structure, and relationship to other variables. This study may extend the conceptualization and reach of MP measurement.
期刊介绍：
Perspectives on Medical Education mission is support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices.
Official journal of the The Netherlands Association of Medical Education (NVMO).
Perspectives on Medical Education is a non-profit Open Access journal with no charges for authors to submit or publish an article, and the full text of all articles is freely available immediately upon publication, thanks to the sponsorship of The Netherlands Association for Medical Education.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy.
Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary.
The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission.
Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary.
The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
