首页> 外文期刊>Endoscopy: Journal for Clinical Use Biopsy and Technique >Development and Validation of a Multiple-Choice Question Paper in Basic Colonoscopy.
【24h】

Development and Validation of a Multiple-Choice Question Paper in Basic Colonoscopy.

机译:基本结肠镜检查中多项选择题的开发和验证。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Factual knowledge underpins competence in all clinical skills. A multiple-choice question paper (MCQ) was designed as part of an accelerated colonoscopy training week (ACTW). In the United Kingdom, there are no validated methods of assessing core knowledge in colonoscopy. The aims of this study were to develop an MCQ paper, to demonstrate its construct validity, and to establish whether the ACTW improved core knowledge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two 30-question MCQ papers (A and B) were designed. Delegates attending the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) 2004 meeting responded either to MCQ paper A or B. Demographic data were collected on their experience in colonoscopy. Doctors attending the ACTW completed either MCQ paper A or B before the course, and the other paper after the course. RESULTS: Seventy-eight delegates at the BSG meeting completed the MCQ. There was a significant difference in the scores between those who had carried out less than 200 colonoscopies (mean 32.5 %) and those who had performed more than 200 (mean 58.4 %; P < 0.0001). Seventeen doctors attending the ACTW completed the MCQ. The mean score for papers A and B increased significantly following the course - 57.2 % before the ACTW, 67 % after it ( P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: This MCQ is capable of differentiating between endoscopists with different levels of experience in colonoscopy. Doctors attending an ACTW significantly improve their knowledge in colonoscopy. A validated MCQ such as this could be used as part of the assessment process to ascertain competence in colonoscopy.
机译:背景和研究目的:事实知识是所有临床技能能力的基础。多项选择题纸(MCQ)被设计为加速结肠镜检查培训周(ACTW)的一部分。在英国,没有经过验证的评估结肠镜检查核心知识的方法。这项研究的目的是开发一份MCQ论文,以证明其构造的有效性,并确定ACTW是否能提高核心知识。材料与方法:设计了两篇30题的MCQ论文(A和B)。参加英国胃肠病学会(BSG)2004年会议的代表对MCQ论文A或B做出了回应。收集了有关结肠镜检查经验的人口统计学数据。参加ACTW的医生在课程开始前完成了MCQ纸A或B,在课程结束后完成了另一纸。结果:在BSG会议上的78名代表完成了MCQ。结肠镜检查少于200例(平均32.5%)和结肠镜检查大于200例(平均58.4%; P <0.0001)之间的得分存在显着差异。参加ACTW的17位医生完成了MCQ。整个过程中,论文A和B的平均得分显着提高-在ACTW之前为57.2%,在ACTW之后为67%(P = 0.003)。结论:该MCQ能够区分具有不同水平结肠镜检查经验的内镜医师。参加ACTW的医生大大提高了他们在结肠镜检查方面的知识。经过验证的MCQ可用作评估过程的一部分,以确定结肠镜检查的能力。

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