PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Clinical Information Literacy (CIL) seems to be a prerequisite for physicians to implement Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) effectively. This study endeavors to develop and validate a CIL questionnaire for medical residents of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences.
METHODS: This study employs sequential-exploratory mixed methods in 2019. The participants were 200 medical residents in different specialties; they are selected through the convenience sampling method. In the first (qualitative) phase, an early CIL questionnaire was designed by reviewing literature and performing complementary interviews with health professionals. In the second (validation) phase, the questionnaire\'s face validity and content validity were confirmed. In the third (quantitative) phase, the construct validity was examined via Item-Response Theory (IRT) model, and the factor loading was computed. The gathered data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-test, two-way ANOVA, as well as two-parameter IRT model in R software.
RESULTS: In the qualitative phase, the concept of CIL is initially described in seven main categories and 22 subcategories, and the items were formulated. An initial 125-item questionnaire was analyzed by the research team, leading to a 43-item. Through the content validity and face validity examination, we removed 11 and 4 items in the Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Content Validity Index (CVI), respectively. Throughout the face validity analysis, none of the items were removed. According to the construct validity results, difficulty coefficient, discriminant coefficient, and factor loading were confirmed, most of the other questions achieved a proper factor loading value that is higher than 0.30, and a value of 0.66 was achieved for the reliability via the Kuder-Richardson method. Ultimately, the real-assessment 28-item CIL questionnaire was developed with four components.
CONCLUSIONS: The CIL questionnaire could be employed to examine the actual CIL basic knowledge. Because of using the real-assessment approach rather than self-assessment in the design, it can be claimed that this instrument can provide a more accurate assessment of the information literacy status of medical residents. This valid questionnaire is used to measure and train the skills needed by healthcare professionals in the effective implementation of EBM.
METHODS: This study employs sequential-exploratory mixed methods in 2019. The participants were 200 medical residents in different specialties; they are selected through the convenience sampling method. In the first (qualitative) phase, an early CIL questionnaire was designed by reviewing literature and performing complementary interviews with health professionals. In the second (validation) phase, the questionnaire\'s face validity and content validity were confirmed. In the third (quantitative) phase, the construct validity was examined via Item-Response Theory (IRT) model, and the factor loading was computed. The gathered data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-test, two-way ANOVA, as well as two-parameter IRT model in R software.
RESULTS: In the qualitative phase, the concept of CIL is initially described in seven main categories and 22 subcategories, and the items were formulated. An initial 125-item questionnaire was analyzed by the research team, leading to a 43-item. Through the content validity and face validity examination, we removed 11 and 4 items in the Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Content Validity Index (CVI), respectively. Throughout the face validity analysis, none of the items were removed. According to the construct validity results, difficulty coefficient, discriminant coefficient, and factor loading were confirmed, most of the other questions achieved a proper factor loading value that is higher than 0.30, and a value of 0.66 was achieved for the reliability via the Kuder-Richardson method. Ultimately, the real-assessment 28-item CIL questionnaire was developed with four components.
CONCLUSIONS: The CIL questionnaire could be employed to examine the actual CIL basic knowledge. Because of using the real-assessment approach rather than self-assessment in the design, it can be claimed that this instrument can provide a more accurate assessment of the information literacy status of medical residents. This valid questionnaire is used to measure and train the skills needed by healthcare professionals in the effective implementation of EBM.
摘要：
背景：临床信息素养（CIL）似乎是医生有效实施循证医学（EBM）的前提。本研究致力于为伊斯法罕医科大学的医学居民开发和验证aCIL问卷。
方法：本研究在2019年采用序贯探索性混合方法。参与者是不同专业的200名医疗居民；他们是通过便利抽样方法选择的。在第一个（定性）阶段，通过回顾文献和对卫生专业人员进行补充访谈,设计了早期CIL问卷.在第二个（验证）阶段，确认了问卷的面形效度和内容效度。在第三个（定量）阶段，通过项目反应理论(IRT)模型检验了结构效度，并计算了因子载荷。收集的数据采用描述性统计分析，t检验,双向方差分析,以及R软件中的双参数IRT模型。
结果：在定性阶段，CIL的概念最初被描述为七个主要类别和22个子类别，并制定了项目。研究小组对最初的125项问卷进行了分析，导致43个项目。通过内容效度和票面效度的检验,我们删除了内容效度比(CVR)和内容效度指数(CVI)中的11项和4项，分别。在整个面部有效性分析中，没有删除任何项目。根据结构效度结果，难度系数,判别系数,并确认了因子负荷，大多数其他问题获得了高于0.30的适当因子加载值，并且通过Kuder-Richardson方法获得了0.66的可靠性值。最终,实际评估28-itemCIL问卷由四个部分组成.
结论：TheCIL问卷可用于检查实际CIL基础知识。由于在设计中使用真实评估方法而不是自我评估，可以说，该工具可以更准确地评估医疗居民的信息素养状况。此有效问卷用于衡量和培训医疗保健专业人员有效实施EBM所需的技能。
方法：本研究在2019年采用序贯探索性混合方法。参与者是不同专业的200名医疗居民；他们是通过便利抽样方法选择的。在第一个（定性）阶段，通过回顾文献和对卫生专业人员进行补充访谈,设计了早期CIL问卷.在第二个（验证）阶段，确认了问卷的面形效度和内容效度。在第三个（定量）阶段，通过项目反应理论(IRT)模型检验了结构效度，并计算了因子载荷。收集的数据采用描述性统计分析，t检验,双向方差分析,以及R软件中的双参数IRT模型。
结果：在定性阶段，CIL的概念最初被描述为七个主要类别和22个子类别，并制定了项目。研究小组对最初的125项问卷进行了分析，导致43个项目。通过内容效度和票面效度的检验,我们删除了内容效度比(CVR)和内容效度指数(CVI)中的11项和4项，分别。在整个面部有效性分析中，没有删除任何项目。根据结构效度结果，难度系数,判别系数,并确认了因子负荷，大多数其他问题获得了高于0.30的适当因子加载值，并且通过Kuder-Richardson方法获得了0.66的可靠性值。最终,实际评估28-itemCIL问卷由四个部分组成.
结论：TheCIL问卷可用于检查实际CIL基础知识。由于在设计中使用真实评估方法而不是自我评估，可以说，该工具可以更准确地评估医疗居民的信息素养状况。此有效问卷用于衡量和培训医疗保健专业人员有效实施EBM所需的技能。
