学习环境(LE)包括社交互动,组织文化,结构,以及影响学生学习体验的物理和虚拟空间。尽管有许多研究探索了医疗保健专业学生(HCPS)对LE的看法,使用问卷的有效性证据尚不清楚.此范围审查旨在确定用于检查本科生HCPS对LE的看法并评估其有效性证据的问卷。使用了五个关键概念:(1)高等教育;(2)问卷调查;(3)LE;(4)感知;(5)卫生专业(HP)。PubMed,ERIC,ProQuest,并在Cochrane数据库中搜索开发或调整问卷以检查LE的研究。这篇综述采用了APERA有效性证据标准和Beckman等人。(JGenInternMed20:1159-1164,2005)根据5类解释本标准:内容,内部结构,响应过程,与其他变量的关系,和后果。在本次审查中包含的41份问卷中,分析显示,主要强调内容和内部结构类别。然而,所包括的问卷中只有不到10%提供了与其他变量相关的信息,后果,和响应过程类别。大多数确定的问卷在医学和护理领域得到了广泛的覆盖,其次是牙科。这篇评论确定了各种问卷,用于检查学生对不同HP的LE的看法。鉴于现有问卷的有效性证据有限,未来的研究应该优先考虑心理测量的发展和验证。这将最终确保HP教育计划中LE的合理和基于证据的质量改进措施。
The learning environment (LE) includes social interactions, organizational culture, structures, and physical and virtual spaces that influence the learning experiences of students. Despite numerous studies exploring the perception of healthcare professional students (HCPS) of their LE, the validity evidence of the utilized questionnaires remains unclear. This scoping
review aimed to identify
questionnaires used to examine the perception of undergraduate HCPS of their LE and to assess their validity evidence. Five key concepts were used: (1) higher education; (2) questionnaire; (3) LE; (4) perception; and (5) health professions (HP). PubMed, ERIC, ProQuest, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies developing or adapting questionnaires to examine LE. This
review employed the APERA standards of validity evidence and Beckman et al. (J Gen Intern Med 20:1159-1164, 2005) interpretation of these standards according to 5 categories: content, internal structure, response process, relation to other variables, and consequences. Out of 41
questionnaires included in this
review, the analysis revealed a predominant emphasis on content and internal structure categories. However, less than 10% of the included questionnaires provided information in relation to other variables, consequences, and response process categories. Most of the identified questionnaires received extensive coverage in the fields of medicine and nursing, followed by dentistry. This
review identified diverse
questionnaires utilized for examining the perception of students of their LE across different HPs. Given the limited validity evidence for existing
questionnaires, future research should prioritize the development and validation of psychometric measures. This will ultimately ensure sound and evidence-based quality improvement measures of the LE in HP education programs.