高级检索

基于德尔菲专家咨询法的内蒙古鄂托克旗鼠疫防控示范区防控效果评价指标体系构建

Construction of an evaluation index system for effectiveness of plague prevention and control in Otog Banner Demonstration Area, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region: a Delphi expert consultation study

    摘要
  • 摘要:
    目的 构建鼠疫防控效果评价指标体系，评估示范区鼠疫防控效果，进一步加强鼠疫防控体系建设。
    方法 于2023年6 — 8月选择20名从事鼠疫防控与研究工作并具有权威性的专家学者，利用德尔菲法（Delphi）构建指标体系，层次分析法计算各级指标的权重。采用问卷回收率表示专家积极系数，采用专家权威系数（Cr）反映专家权威性，采用变异系数（CV）和肯德尔和谐系数（Kendall′s W）反映专家咨询的协调性。使用 SPSS 25.0 和 yaahp 10.1 软件进行统计分析。
    结果 3轮专家咨询的积极系数均为100%，专家积极程度高。3轮Cr均 > 0.7，专家权威程度较高。第3轮变异系数（CV） < 0.25，第3轮指标的Kendall′s W较第1、2轮递增，且接近0.4（P值均 < 0.01）。指标体系最终确定3个1级指标（事前准备能力、事中处理能力、事后恢复能力，所占权重分别为33.33%、33.34%、33.33%），10个2级指标（其中总结分析能力与损失修复能力的权重最高，为16.67%；其次是监测预警能力为15.68%）和58个3级指标（其中网络直报率与专业人员负责鼠疫资料的权重最高，为4.76％；其次是鼠疫监测数据库、预警平台，分别为3.62%、3.10%）。
    结论 鼠疫防控示范区效果评价指标体系有一定的科学性及可靠性，能够较为全面、准确地评价示范区鼠疫防控效果，有利于建设更加完善的防控体系，并对于其他地区做好鼠疫防控工作提供参考与借鉴。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective To establish an evaluation index system for the effectiveness of plague prevention and control in demonstration areas to strengthen the plague prevention and control system.
    Methods After constructing a primary index system to evaluate the effectiveness of plague prevention and control through literature study and expert interview, we conducted three rounds of online Delphi consultation among 20 authoritative experts and scholars engaged in plague prevention, control, and research from 5 provincial-level administrative divisions from June to August 2023. The response rate of the questionnaire was used to represent the expert activity coefficient. The analytical hierarchy method was used to calculate the weights of indicators at three levels. The coefficient of expert authority (Cr) was used to reflect the expert authority, and the coefficient of variation (CV) and Kendall's coefficient of concordance (Kendall′s W) were used to reflect the coordination of expert consultation. SPSS 25.0 and yaahp 10.1 software were used for statistical analysis.
    Results The activity coefficients of the three rounds of expert consultation were all 100%, indicating a high degree of expert activity. The Cr values of the three rounds were all greater than 0.7, indicating a high degree of expert authority. In the third round, the coefficient of variation (CV) was < 0.25, and the Kendall's W of the indicators increased compared to those of the first and second rounds, approaching 0.4 (P < 0.01). The final index system consisted of 3 first-level indicators (pre-event preparedness, in-event handling ability, and post-event recovery ability, with weights of 33.33%, 33.34%, and 33.33%, respectively), 10 second-level indicators (among which, summary analysis ability and damage repair ability had the highest weights of 16.67%, followed by monitoring and early warning ability with 15.68%), and 58 third-level indicators (among which, network direct reporting rate and professional responsible for plague data had the highest weights of 4.76%, followed by plague monitoring database and early warning platform with 3.62%, 3.10% , respectively).
    Conclusion The established index system has certain scientific validity and reliability to comprehensively and accurately evaluate the effectiveness of plague prevention and control in demonstration areas, and is conducive to building a more complete prevention and control system, and provides a reference for other regions to carry out plague prevention and control work.

     

    • HTML全文
    • 参考文献(20)
    • 相关文章
    • 施引文献
  • 资源附件(0)

/

返回文章
返回