首页> 外文期刊>Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges >Factor analysis methods and validity evidence: A review of instrument development across the medical education continuum
【24h】

Factor analysis methods and validity evidence: A review of instrument development across the medical education continuum

机译:因子分析方法和有效性证据:贯穿医学教育连续性的仪器开发回顾

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: Instrument development consistent with best practices is necessary for effective assessment and evaluation of learners and programs across the medical education continuum. The author explored the extent to which current factor analytic methods and other techniques for establishing validity are consistent with best practices. Method: The author conducted electronic and hand searches of the English-language medical education literature published January 2006 through December 2010. To describe and assess current practices, she systematically abstracted reliability and validity evidence as well as factor analysis methods, data analysis, and reported evidence from instrument development articles reporting the application of exploratory factor analysis and principal component analysis. Results: Sixty-two articles met eligibility criteria. They described 64 instruments and 95 factor analyses. Most studies provided at least one source of evidence based on test content. Almost all reported internal consistency, providing evidence based on internal structure. Evidence based on response process and relationships with other variables was reported less often, and evidence based on consequences of testing was not identified. Factor analysis findings suggest common method selection errors and critical omissions in reporting. Conclusions: Given the limited reliability and validity evidence provided for the reviewed instruments, educators should carefully consider the available supporting evidence before adopting and applying published instruments. Researchers should design for, test, and report additional evidence to strengthen the argument for reliability and validity of these measures for research and practice.
机译:目的:与最佳实践一致的仪器开发对于有效评估和评估医学教育连续性中的学习者和计划是必要的。作者探讨了当前因素分析方法和其他用于确定有效性的技术与最佳实践保持一致的程度。方法:作者对2006年1月至2010年12月出版的英语医学教育文献进行了电子和手工搜索。为了描述和评估当前的做法,她系统地提取了信度和效度证据以及因素分析方法,数据分析和报告。仪器开发文章中的证据报告了探索性因素分析和主成分分析的应用。结果:62篇文章符合入选标准。他们描述了64种仪器和95种因子分析。大多数研究基于测试内容提供了至少一种证据来源。几乎所有报告的内部一致性,提供基于内部结构的证据。基于响应过程以及与其他变量之间关系的证据报道较少,并且未确定基于测试结果的证据。因子分析结果表明常见的方法选择错误和报告中的关键遗漏。结论:鉴于为所审查工具提供的信度和效度证据有限,因此,在采用和应用已发布的工具之前,教育工作者应仔细考虑可用的支持证据。研究人员应设计,测试和报告其他证据,以加强对这些措施在研究和实践中的可靠性和有效性的论证。

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