医学教育中药物治疗能力的结构化口腔临床评估:七个领域的效度和信度分析研究。

Korean journal of medical education Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-28 DOI:10.3946/kjme.2025.345
Abdul Khairul Rizki Purba, David Sontani Perdanakusuma, Arifa Mustika, Tanja Fens, Maarten Jacobus Postma
{"title":"医学教育中药物治疗能力的结构化口腔临床评估:七个领域的效度和信度分析研究。","authors":"Abdul Khairul Rizki Purba, David Sontani Perdanakusuma, Arifa Mustika, Tanja Fens, Maarten Jacobus Postma","doi":"10.3946/kjme.2025.345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To develop and validate a structured oral clinical assessment (SOCA) tool to evaluate pharmacotherapy competencies among medical students during clinical clerkships.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The instrument was designed around seven core pharmacotherapy domains. A total of 30 pharmacology experts participated in the face and content validity assessments. The cognitive complexity was evaluated using Bloom's taxonomy. Nine trained examiners assessed 77 clerkship students using the SOCA tool. Construct validity was tested using Spearman correlation, whereas inter-rater reliability was analyzed using Cohen's kappa and Krippendorff's alpha. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All items showed strong content validity (item-level content validity index and face validity index=1.00). Most questions reflected moderate to high cognitive complexity (Bloom's C2-C5). Construct validity was supported by significant domain-total score correlations (r=0.406-0.750; p<0.05). Inter-rater reliability was substantial (kappa=0.651-0.830; Krippendorff's alpha=0.639-0.834), and internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha=0.759).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The SOCA tool has strong validity and reliability for evaluating pharmacotherapy competence through oral clinical examination. It offers a structured, feasible alternative to existing formats and has the potential for broader use following external validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":37737,"journal":{"name":"Korean journal of medical education","volume":"37 3","pages":"331-343"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12415394/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Structured oral clinical assessment for pharmacotherapy competencies in medical education: a study of validity and reliability analyses of seven domains.\",\"authors\":\"Abdul Khairul Rizki Purba, David Sontani Perdanakusuma, Arifa Mustika, Tanja Fens, Maarten Jacobus Postma\",\"doi\":\"10.3946/kjme.2025.345\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To develop and validate a structured oral clinical assessment (SOCA) tool to evaluate pharmacotherapy competencies among medical students during clinical clerkships.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The instrument was designed around seven core pharmacotherapy domains. A total of 30 pharmacology experts participated in the face and content validity assessments. The cognitive complexity was evaluated using Bloom's taxonomy. Nine trained examiners assessed 77 clerkship students using the SOCA tool. Construct validity was tested using Spearman correlation, whereas inter-rater reliability was analyzed using Cohen's kappa and Krippendorff's alpha. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All items showed strong content validity (item-level content validity index and face validity index=1.00). Most questions reflected moderate to high cognitive complexity (Bloom's C2-C5). Construct validity was supported by significant domain-total score correlations (r=0.406-0.750; p<0.05). Inter-rater reliability was substantial (kappa=0.651-0.830; Krippendorff's alpha=0.639-0.834), and internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha=0.759).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The SOCA tool has strong validity and reliability for evaluating pharmacotherapy competence through oral clinical examination. It offers a structured, feasible alternative to existing formats and has the potential for broader use following external validation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37737,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean journal of medical education\",\"volume\":\"37 3\",\"pages\":\"331-343\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12415394/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean journal of medical education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2025.345\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean journal of medical education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2025.345","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:开发并验证结构化口腔临床评估(SOCA)工具,以评估医学生在临床见习期间的药物治疗能力。方法:该仪器围绕七个核心药物治疗领域进行设计。共有30位药理学专家参与了面部和内容效度评估。使用Bloom分类法评估认知复杂性。9名训练有素的考官使用SOCA工具评估了77名见习学生。构念效度测试采用Spearman相关,而信度分析采用Cohen’s kappa和Krippendorff’s alpha。内部一致性采用Cronbach’s alpha评价。结果:所有题项的内容效度均较强(题项层面内容效度指数和面效度指数均为1.00)。大多数问题反映了中度到高度的认知复杂性(Bloom的C2-C5)。结论:SOCA工具用于口腔临床检查药物治疗能力评价具有较强的效度和信度。它为现有格式提供了一种结构化的、可行的替代方案,并且在外部验证之后具有更广泛使用的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Structured oral clinical assessment for pharmacotherapy competencies in medical education: a study of validity and reliability analyses of seven domains.

Purpose: To develop and validate a structured oral clinical assessment (SOCA) tool to evaluate pharmacotherapy competencies among medical students during clinical clerkships.

Methods: The instrument was designed around seven core pharmacotherapy domains. A total of 30 pharmacology experts participated in the face and content validity assessments. The cognitive complexity was evaluated using Bloom's taxonomy. Nine trained examiners assessed 77 clerkship students using the SOCA tool. Construct validity was tested using Spearman correlation, whereas inter-rater reliability was analyzed using Cohen's kappa and Krippendorff's alpha. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha.

Results: All items showed strong content validity (item-level content validity index and face validity index=1.00). Most questions reflected moderate to high cognitive complexity (Bloom's C2-C5). Construct validity was supported by significant domain-total score correlations (r=0.406-0.750; p<0.05). Inter-rater reliability was substantial (kappa=0.651-0.830; Krippendorff's alpha=0.639-0.834), and internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha=0.759).

Conclusion: The SOCA tool has strong validity and reliability for evaluating pharmacotherapy competence through oral clinical examination. It offers a structured, feasible alternative to existing formats and has the potential for broader use following external validation.

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
Korean journal of medical education
Korean journal of medical education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The journal seeks to provide theoretical foundations, practical analysis, and up-to-date developments in health professional education: Curriculum development Teaching and learning Student assessment Educational evaluation Educational management and policy The journal welcomes high-quality papers on all levels of health professional education, including: Undergraduate education Postgraduate training Continuous professional development Interprofessional education.
×
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