...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of evaluation in clinical practice >Consensus on interprofessional collaboration in hospitals: Statistical agreement of ratings from ethnographic fieldwork and measurement scales
【24h】

Consensus on interprofessional collaboration in hospitals: Statistical agreement of ratings from ethnographic fieldwork and measurement scales

机译:医院专业间合作的共识:人种志田野调查和量表的评分统计一致

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Rationale: Few methods are available for analysing psychometric properties of combined qualitative and quantitative data. While conventional reliability of measures - meaning reproducibility or consistency - may not be meaningful in small-N research, in some health services studies agreement on perceptions arising from data generated by fieldwork and quantitative measures can be examined to good effect. Methods: We studied interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in seven hospitals. An ethnographer shadowed and conducted interviews with regulated health professionals in medicine wards. Concurrently, nurses completed the nurse-doctor relations subscale of the Nursing Work Index (NWI-NDRS) and a new measurement scale for IPC with doctors in the domains of communication, accommodation, and isolation. After fieldwork, the ethnographer rank-ordered hospital sites on IPC from 1 to 7 based on interpretation of the qualitative data. Mean-scale scores were calculated for hospital sites and converted to ranks similarly. The Tinsley-Weiss T-index (Tinsley & Weiss, 1975) for agreement among rank orderings was calculated for dyadic combinations of fieldwork and measurement ranks. Results: Perfect agreement was obtained for the most liberal agreement definitions considered - differences of two rank positions - involving qualitative data agreement with IPC subscales for accommodation and isolation. Defining agreement as a difference of 1 rank at most, the T-index was 0.77 for agreement between fieldworker and IPC accommodation and the same for NWI-NDRS and IPC isolation. Conclusion: Qualitative data from fieldwork rankings were substantially in accord with the contemporary IPC scales, less so with the NWI-NDRS. Qualitative data appear to be useful as an additional approach to confirming the validity of quantitative scale data in measuring a complex interpersonal relational construct.
机译:原理:很少有方法可用于分析定性和定量数据组合的心理测量特性。尽管常规的措施可靠性(即可重复性或一致性)在小样本量研究中可能没有意义,但在某些卫生服务研究中,可以对田野调查和定量措施产生的数据所产生的看法达成共识,以取得良好的效果。方法:我们研究了七家医院的专业间合作(IPC)。一位民族志专家在医学病房中对受监管的卫生专业人员进行了遮蔽并进行了采访。同时,护士完成了护理工作指数(NWI-NDRS)的护士-医生关系子量表以及与IPC在沟通,住宿和隔离领域的医生的新测量量表。实地调查后,民族志专家根据对定性数据的解释,对IPC上的医院场所从1到7进行了排序。计算医院现场的平均量表分数,并类似地转换为等级。对于田野调查和测量等级的二元组合,计算了等级排序之间的一致性的Tinsley-Weiss T指数(Tinsley&Weiss,1975)。结果:对于所考虑的最宽松的协议定义(两个职位的差异)获得了完美的协议-涉及与IPC分量表进行定性和数据隔离的定性数据协议。将协议定义为最多相差1级,对于田野工作者和IPC机构之间的协议,T指数为0.77,对于NWI-NDRS和IPC隔离,T指数为0.77。结论:实地调查排名中的定性数据与现代IPC量表基本吻合,而NWI-NDRS则不然。定性数据似乎可以用作确认定量量表数据在测量复杂的人际关系结构中的有效性的另一种方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号