在开发物理治疗临床教育课程评估工具的过程中使用德尔菲技术

V. Naidoo, PhD A Stewart, PhD D Maleka
{"title":"在开发物理治疗临床教育课程评估工具的过程中使用德尔菲技术","authors":"V. Naidoo, PhD A Stewart, PhD D Maleka","doi":"10.7196/ajhpe.2023.v15i4.1670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectively evaluating the quality and effectiveness of a physiotherapy clinical education programme has been unsuccessful to date, due to its complexity and the lack of a standardised tool. We undertook to develop a standardised programme evaluation tool and used the Delphi method to obtain consensus (set at 80%) to determine the face and content validity of the items and domains of the tool, the scoring system and a name for the tool. Academics, clinical physiotherapists and clinical physiotherapy educators participated in the Delphi rounds. Three Delphi rounds ensued: in Delphi round 1, a 71% response rate was obtained and 49 questions obtained 80% consensus. In Delphi round 2, a 91% response rate was obtained and 59 questions obtained 80% consensus. In Delphi round 3, a 42% response rate was obtained, several names were suggested, and the scoring system was established. The provisional tool of 85 items ultimately emerged as the Vaneshveri Naidoo Clinical Programme Evaluation Tool (VN-CPET).","PeriodicalId":503156,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Health Professions Education","volume":"77 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The use of the Delphi technique as part of the process of developing a tool to evaluate physiotherapy clinical education programmes\",\"authors\":\"V. Naidoo, PhD A Stewart, PhD D Maleka\",\"doi\":\"10.7196/ajhpe.2023.v15i4.1670\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectively evaluating the quality and effectiveness of a physiotherapy clinical education programme has been unsuccessful to date, due to its complexity and the lack of a standardised tool. We undertook to develop a standardised programme evaluation tool and used the Delphi method to obtain consensus (set at 80%) to determine the face and content validity of the items and domains of the tool, the scoring system and a name for the tool. Academics, clinical physiotherapists and clinical physiotherapy educators participated in the Delphi rounds. Three Delphi rounds ensued: in Delphi round 1, a 71% response rate was obtained and 49 questions obtained 80% consensus. In Delphi round 2, a 91% response rate was obtained and 59 questions obtained 80% consensus. In Delphi round 3, a 42% response rate was obtained, several names were suggested, and the scoring system was established. The provisional tool of 85 items ultimately emerged as the Vaneshveri Naidoo Clinical Programme Evaluation Tool (VN-CPET).\",\"PeriodicalId\":503156,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Journal of Health Professions Education\",\"volume\":\"77 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Journal of Health Professions Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7196/ajhpe.2023.v15i4.1670\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Health Professions Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7196/ajhpe.2023.v15i4.1670","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

客观评估物理治疗临床教育项目的质量和有效性,由于其复杂性和缺乏标准化工具,迄今为止一直未能成功。我们着手开发了一种标准化的课程评估工具,并采用德尔菲法达成共识(设定为 80%),以确定工具的项目和领域、评分系统以及工具名称的表面和内容效度。学者、临床物理治疗师和临床物理治疗教育工作者参加了德尔菲讨论。随后进行了三轮德尔菲讨论:在第一轮德尔菲讨论中,获得了 71% 的回应率,49 个问题获得了 80% 的共识。在德尔菲第二轮中,获得了 91% 的回应率,59 个问题获得了 80% 的共识。在德尔菲第三轮中,获得了 42% 的回复率,提出了几个名称,并建立了评分系统。由 85 个项目组成的临时工具最终成为 Vaneshveri Naidoo 临床项目评估工具 (VN-CPET)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The use of the Delphi technique as part of the process of developing a tool to evaluate physiotherapy clinical education programmes
Objectively evaluating the quality and effectiveness of a physiotherapy clinical education programme has been unsuccessful to date, due to its complexity and the lack of a standardised tool. We undertook to develop a standardised programme evaluation tool and used the Delphi method to obtain consensus (set at 80%) to determine the face and content validity of the items and domains of the tool, the scoring system and a name for the tool. Academics, clinical physiotherapists and clinical physiotherapy educators participated in the Delphi rounds. Three Delphi rounds ensued: in Delphi round 1, a 71% response rate was obtained and 49 questions obtained 80% consensus. In Delphi round 2, a 91% response rate was obtained and 59 questions obtained 80% consensus. In Delphi round 3, a 42% response rate was obtained, several names were suggested, and the scoring system was established. The provisional tool of 85 items ultimately emerged as the Vaneshveri Naidoo Clinical Programme Evaluation Tool (VN-CPET).
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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信