高级检索

青少年医学素养评价指标体系构建:基于德尔菲专家咨询法

Construction of the evaluation index system of adolescent medical literacy: based on Delphi expert consultation method

  • 摘要:
    目的 基于核心素养框架构建青少年医学素养评价指标,为教育及卫生部门制定和实施有效的健康教育干预措施及青少年医学素养的研究提供科学依据及基础。
    方法  2024年11月—2025年10月,通过文献研究、半结构化访谈、小组讨论构建指标条目池,采用德尔菲法对18名专家进行2轮咨询确定评价指标,并运用层次分析法(AHP)计算各指标的权重。
    结果 2轮专家咨询问卷回收率均为100%,专家权威系数均为0.93,专家权威程度较高;2轮专家意见协调系数Kendall′s W 分别为0.316、0.276,组内相关系数分别为0.935、0.961,专家意见一致性较好。 构建的青少年医学素养评价指标包括基本医学知识、医疗救护技能、医学认知态度3个维度,11个二级指标,56个条目。一级指标权重从大到小分别是基本医学知识(0.400)、医学认知态度(0.400)、医疗救护技能(0.200)。二级指标中,认知(0.500)、疾病防治知识(0.391)、常见急症处理(0.351)、基础生命知识(0.351)权重居前4位。一级指标、二级指标和三级指标的一致性比率均<0.1,满足一致性检验的标准要求,指标权重分配合理。
    结论 构建的青少年医学素养评价指标具有一定的科学性和可靠性,可为教育部门及学校制定青少年健康教育课程内容提供参考。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective  To construct the evaluation indexes for adolescent medical literacy based on the core literacy framework, thus providing a scientific basis for education and health departments to formulate and implement effective health education interventions and the research on adolescent medical literacy.
    Methods From November 2024 to October 2025, through literature review, semi-structured interviews, and group discussions, the item pool of indexes was constructed. Delphi method was employed to conduct two rounds of consultation with 18 experts to determine the evaluation indexes, and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was adopted to calculate the weight of each index.
    Results The questionnaire recovery rates in the two rounds of expert consultation were both 100%, and the expert authority coefficients were both 0.93, indicating a high degree of expert authority. The two rounds of expert consultation showed the Kendall′s coefficients of concordance of expert opinions being 0.316 and 0.276 and the intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) being 0.935 and 0.961, respectively, which indicated that the expert opinions were consistent. The evaluation index system of medical literacy for adolescents was composed of 56 items in 11 second-level indexes from 3 dimensions of basic medical knowledge, medical rescue skills, and medical cognitive attitude. The first-level indexes with weights from high to low were basic medical knowledge (0.400), medical cognitive attitude (0.400), and medical rescue skills (0.200). Among the second-level indexes, cognition (0.500), disease prevention and treatment knowledge (0.391), common emergency treatment (0.351), and basic life knowledge (0.351) ranked the top four. The consistency ratios of the first-level indexes, the second-level indexes, and the third-level indexes were all less than 0.1, which met the standard requirements of consistency test, and the weight distribution of indexes was reasonable.
    Conclusions The evaluation indexes of adolescent medical literacy are scientific and reliable, which can provide reference for education departments and schools to formulate the curriculum contents of adolescent health education.

     

/

返回文章
返回