针对中国临床实习生的临床学习评价问卷的跨文化适应和验证。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Luhua Yang, Jiangang Sun, Ruirui Wang, Shaochen Tao, Shanshan Wei, Liang Dong, Yansheng Gu, Jiayue Wang
{"title":"针对中国临床实习生的临床学习评价问卷的跨文化适应和验证。","authors":"Luhua Yang, Jiangang Sun, Ruirui Wang, Shaochen Tao, Shanshan Wei, Liang Dong, Yansheng Gu, Jiayue Wang","doi":"10.1186/s12909-025-07088-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of an adapted English questionnaire in Chinese medical schools, assessing its cross-cultural applicability in China.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was conducted among clinical medical interns from four medical schools in China, collecting 216 valid responses. The questionnaire, based on the latest version of CLEQ, consisted of four dimensions and 18 items. It was translated into Chinese through a six-step forward and backward translation process. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 26 and IBM SPSS AMOS 28 Graphics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings demonstrate that the translated questionnaire is suitable for Chinese clinical medical interns. Except for the \"Learning Motivation\" dimension with a reliability coefficient of 0.760, all other dimensions scored between 0.8 and 1, indicating strong internal consistency and reliability. Correlation coefficients exceeded 0.5, confirming good test-retest reliability. Model fit indices indicated good compatibility (CMIN/DF = 1.749, RMSEA = 0.057, and IFI, TLI, CFI > 0.9). Validity testing showed that all dimensions, except \"Learning Motivation,\" had AVE values above 0.5 and CR values above 0.7,indicating good convergent validity and composite reliability. The discriminant validity of all dimensions was confirmed, as standardized correlation coefficients between each pair remained below the square root of their respective average variance extracted (AVE) values.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The four-factor CLEQ questionnaire shows good validity and reliability among Chinese clinical interns.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":51234,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Education","volume":"25 1","pages":"495"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11977939/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the clinical learning evaluation questionnaire with Chinese clinical interns.\",\"authors\":\"Luhua Yang, Jiangang Sun, Ruirui Wang, Shaochen Tao, Shanshan Wei, Liang Dong, Yansheng Gu, Jiayue Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12909-025-07088-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of an adapted English questionnaire in Chinese medical schools, assessing its cross-cultural applicability in China.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was conducted among clinical medical interns from four medical schools in China, collecting 216 valid responses. The questionnaire, based on the latest version of CLEQ, consisted of four dimensions and 18 items. It was translated into Chinese through a six-step forward and backward translation process. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 26 and IBM SPSS AMOS 28 Graphics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings demonstrate that the translated questionnaire is suitable for Chinese clinical medical interns. Except for the \\\"Learning Motivation\\\" dimension with a reliability coefficient of 0.760, all other dimensions scored between 0.8 and 1, indicating strong internal consistency and reliability. Correlation coefficients exceeded 0.5, confirming good test-retest reliability. Model fit indices indicated good compatibility (CMIN/DF = 1.749, RMSEA = 0.057, and IFI, TLI, CFI > 0.9). Validity testing showed that all dimensions, except \\\"Learning Motivation,\\\" had AVE values above 0.5 and CR values above 0.7,indicating good convergent validity and composite reliability. The discriminant validity of all dimensions was confirmed, as standardized correlation coefficients between each pair remained below the square root of their respective average variance extracted (AVE) values.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The four-factor CLEQ questionnaire shows good validity and reliability among Chinese clinical interns.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Education\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"495\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11977939/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07088-9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07088-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究旨在评估中国医学院校改编的英文问卷的信度和效度,评估其在中国的跨文化适用性。方法:对全国四所医学院临床实习医师进行问卷调查,收集有效问卷216份。问卷以最新版的CLEQ为基础,由四个维度和18个项目组成。通过前后六步的翻译过程,它被翻译成中文。采用IBM SPSS Statistics 26和IBM SPSS AMOS 28 Graphics对数据进行分析。结果:翻译后的问卷适用于中国临床医学实习生。除“学习动机”维度信度系数为0.760外,其余维度得分均在0.8 - 1之间,表明内部一致性和信度较强。相关系数大于0.5,证明重测信度良好。模型拟合指标相容性良好(CMIN/DF = 1.749, RMSEA = 0.057, IFI、TLI、CFI > = 0.9)。效度检验显示,除“学习动机”外,各维度的AVE值均在0.5以上,CR值均在0.7以上,具有较好的收敛效度和复合信度。所有维度的判别效度均得到确认,因为每对之间的标准化相关系数仍低于其各自平均方差提取(AVE)值的平方根。结论:四因素CLEQ问卷在中国临床实习生中具有良好的效度和信度。临床试验号:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the clinical learning evaluation questionnaire with Chinese clinical interns.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of an adapted English questionnaire in Chinese medical schools, assessing its cross-cultural applicability in China.

Methods: A survey was conducted among clinical medical interns from four medical schools in China, collecting 216 valid responses. The questionnaire, based on the latest version of CLEQ, consisted of four dimensions and 18 items. It was translated into Chinese through a six-step forward and backward translation process. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 26 and IBM SPSS AMOS 28 Graphics.

Results: The findings demonstrate that the translated questionnaire is suitable for Chinese clinical medical interns. Except for the "Learning Motivation" dimension with a reliability coefficient of 0.760, all other dimensions scored between 0.8 and 1, indicating strong internal consistency and reliability. Correlation coefficients exceeded 0.5, confirming good test-retest reliability. Model fit indices indicated good compatibility (CMIN/DF = 1.749, RMSEA = 0.057, and IFI, TLI, CFI > 0.9). Validity testing showed that all dimensions, except "Learning Motivation," had AVE values above 0.5 and CR values above 0.7,indicating good convergent validity and composite reliability. The discriminant validity of all dimensions was confirmed, as standardized correlation coefficients between each pair remained below the square root of their respective average variance extracted (AVE) values.

Conclusion: The four-factor CLEQ questionnaire shows good validity and reliability among Chinese clinical interns.

Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

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
BMC Medical Education
BMC Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
795
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Education is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the training of healthcare professionals, including undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education. The journal has a special focus on curriculum development, evaluations of performance, assessment of training needs and evidence-based medicine.
×
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