跨专业合作者评估量表的判别效度。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Justin Weppner
{"title":"跨专业合作者评估量表的判别效度。","authors":"Justin Weppner","doi":"10.1080/13561820.2025.2542828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper reports on the discriminative validity of the Interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric (ICAR) as a tool for evaluating interprofessional collaboration skills. Direct observation is essential in medical residency training, enhancing clinical competence and educational quality. The study involved 50 medical faculty members from 11 Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation residency programs who evaluated 12 scripted videos depicting four performance levels - minimal, developing, competent, and mastery - using the ICAR. The videos featured six standardized interprofessional participants, facilitated by a third-year postgraduate medical resident, in an interprofessional team meeting. Participants rated the interprofessional skills observed across six dimensions and 31-items on the ICAR 5-point scale with a maximum score of 124. Results showed that the ICAR effectively distinguished between different performance levels, with statistically significant differences in ratings (<i>p</i> < .001). The mean scores for the videos were as follows: <i>minimal competency</i> = 34.54, <i>developing competence</i> = 70.23, <i>competent</i> = 92.75, and <i>mastery</i> = 121.3. The study highlights the ICAR's discriminative validity and ability to differentiate interprofessional skills accurately. Future researchers should explore enhancing faculty observation skills and reducing interrater variability. In conclusion, the ICAR is a promising tool for assessing interprofessional skills and supporting competency-based decision-making in residency training.</p>","PeriodicalId":50174,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discriminative validity of the interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric.\",\"authors\":\"Justin Weppner\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13561820.2025.2542828\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This paper reports on the discriminative validity of the Interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric (ICAR) as a tool for evaluating interprofessional collaboration skills. Direct observation is essential in medical residency training, enhancing clinical competence and educational quality. The study involved 50 medical faculty members from 11 Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation residency programs who evaluated 12 scripted videos depicting four performance levels - minimal, developing, competent, and mastery - using the ICAR. The videos featured six standardized interprofessional participants, facilitated by a third-year postgraduate medical resident, in an interprofessional team meeting. Participants rated the interprofessional skills observed across six dimensions and 31-items on the ICAR 5-point scale with a maximum score of 124. Results showed that the ICAR effectively distinguished between different performance levels, with statistically significant differences in ratings (<i>p</i> < .001). The mean scores for the videos were as follows: <i>minimal competency</i> = 34.54, <i>developing competence</i> = 70.23, <i>competent</i> = 92.75, and <i>mastery</i> = 121.3. The study highlights the ICAR's discriminative validity and ability to differentiate interprofessional skills accurately. Future researchers should explore enhancing faculty observation skills and reducing interrater variability. In conclusion, the ICAR is a promising tool for assessing interprofessional skills and supporting competency-based decision-making in residency training.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interprofessional Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Interprofessional Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2025.2542828\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interprofessional Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2025.2542828","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文报道了跨专业合作者评估量表(ICAR)作为评估跨专业协作技能的工具的区别效度。直接观察是提高住院医师临床能力和教育质量的重要环节。这项研究涉及了来自11个物理医学和康复住院医师项目的50名医学教员,他们使用ICAR评估了12个脚本视频,这些视频描述了四个表现水平——最低水平、发展水平、胜任水平和精通水平。在视频中,六名标准化的跨专业参与者在一名三年级研究生住院医师的协助下,参加了一次跨专业小组会议。参与者对ICAR 5分制的6个维度和31个项目所观察到的跨专业技能进行评分,最高得分为124分。结果显示,ICAR在不同绩效水平之间具有显著的差异,其中p最小胜任力= 34.54,p发展胜任力= 70.23,p胜任力= 92.75,p精通胜任力= 121.3。该研究突出了ICAR的判别效度和准确区分跨专业技能的能力。未来的研究者应该探索如何提高教师的观察技能和减少翻译间的差异。总之,ICAR是一个很有前途的工具,用于评估住院医师培训中的跨专业技能和支持基于能力的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Discriminative validity of the interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric.

This paper reports on the discriminative validity of the Interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric (ICAR) as a tool for evaluating interprofessional collaboration skills. Direct observation is essential in medical residency training, enhancing clinical competence and educational quality. The study involved 50 medical faculty members from 11 Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation residency programs who evaluated 12 scripted videos depicting four performance levels - minimal, developing, competent, and mastery - using the ICAR. The videos featured six standardized interprofessional participants, facilitated by a third-year postgraduate medical resident, in an interprofessional team meeting. Participants rated the interprofessional skills observed across six dimensions and 31-items on the ICAR 5-point scale with a maximum score of 124. Results showed that the ICAR effectively distinguished between different performance levels, with statistically significant differences in ratings (p < .001). The mean scores for the videos were as follows: minimal competency = 34.54, developing competence = 70.23, competent = 92.75, and mastery = 121.3. The study highlights the ICAR's discriminative validity and ability to differentiate interprofessional skills accurately. Future researchers should explore enhancing faculty observation skills and reducing interrater variability. In conclusion, the ICAR is a promising tool for assessing interprofessional skills and supporting competency-based decision-making in residency training.

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
Journal of Interprofessional Care
Journal of Interprofessional Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
14.80%
发文量
124
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Interprofessional Care disseminates research and new developments in the field of interprofessional education and practice. We welcome contributions containing an explicit interprofessional focus, and involving a range of settings, professions, and fields. Areas of practice covered include primary, community and hospital care, health education and public health, and beyond health and social care into fields such as criminal justice and primary/elementary education. Papers introducing additional interprofessional views, for example, from a community development or environmental design perspective, are welcome. The Journal is disseminated internationally and encourages submissions from around the world.
×
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