Interdisciplinary Health Care Evaluation Instruments: A Review of Psychometric Evidence

Kang, Hosung; Flores‐Sandoval, Cecilia; Law, Benson; Sibbald, Shannon L.

doi:10.1177/01632787211040859

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on Kang et al . research, CPAT provided a compatible tool to measure teamwork in a general medical care setting [ 26 ]. The domains were derived from current literature about the interprofessional collaborative framework and it was one of few scales that emphasized “patient involvement” as one of the collaborative tasks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability and validity of the Taiwanese version of the collaborative practice assessment tool: A pilot study

Yeh

Lee

et al. 2023

Tzu Chi Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A BSTRACT Objectives: To promote teamwork communication and collaboration between health-care professionals, educators emphasized proper training programs to develop interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP) among postgraduate (PG) trainees. A literature review indicated that the faculty necessarily measured the competency in IPCP with structured and applicable assessment tools in collocation to training programs domestically. A cross-sectional psychometric study was conducted to construct a reliable assessment tool for measuring PG learning outcome in Taiwan through a bidirectional translation. The study aimed to assess the interprofessional team behavior of trainees using the Taiwanese version of the collaborative practice assessment tool (T-CPAT). Materials and Methods: The study recruited 43 participants to undergo a PG training program in a single institute and to complete T-CPAT. Data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software. We employed descriptive analysis of demographic variables. The validity of T-CPAT was analyzed by experts in different specialties and its availability was assessed by item-level analysis. Furthermore, the T-CPAT reliability was tested using Cronbach’s α. Results: The average score was 305.2 (standard deviation = 38.08), and the expert validity of the T-CPAT was 0.96. In the item-level analysis, there were no failure items in T-CAPT. Cronbach’s α reached 0.94 (95% confidence interval = 0.90–0.96). Conclusion: The study demonstrated good reliability and validity for the T-CPAT. Thus, the T-CPAT can be used to accurately measure and assess the competence of IPCP in PG trainees in general medicine in Taiwan. The results were deemed sufficient to provide faculties with related arrangements for future teaching plans.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The results of item-level analysis showed that the failure indicators of all items were <3, thus there were no failure items in T-CAPT [ 24 - 26 ]. According to Tu JT.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and validity of the Taiwanese version of the collaborative practice assessment tool: A pilot study

Yeh

Lee

et al. 2023

Tzu Chi Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The review conducted by Kang et al (Kang et al, 2022) presented seven instruments designed for the assessment of collaborative efforts within health care teams. Most of these instruments consist of objective and quantitative items related to attributes that lead to the socio-affective interactions established between health care professionals, including communication, role definition, and decision-making.…”

Section: Learning Assessment Instruments In the Health Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These strategies encompass elements such as teamwork, role definition, communication, feedback, learning, reflective thinking, patient-centred focus, and ethical conduct. Some authors deem it essential to undertake research focused on the development and evaluation of learning assessment instruments tailored for use within collaborative settings comprising varied health care professionals (Kang et al, 2022;Thistlethwaite et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Situational Judgment Tests in Interprofessional Health Education

Gaspar,

da Silva Abbad

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Situational Judgment Tests (SJTs) have been considered a valuable strategy to assess attitudinal skills learning in practical scenarios. The objectives of this study are: 1) to describe the process of development and semantic and content evaluation of a SJT in the work of health care residents; 2) to describe the development of a correction sheet for the STJ (answer sheet); and 3) to test the equivalence of complexity of the content of the SJT items. The data from 15 interviews conducted with preceptors and both medical and non-medical residents were analyzed by a group of 6 researchers. They identified gaps in the predominant social skills necessary for collaborative work and training of health residents: understanding roles and responsibilities, debate of different opinions, and collaborative decision-making. Based on these three skills, six real-life situations in multidisciplinary health settings and four open-ended questions were developed for residents to solve. The test content underwent both semantic and content validation. Three tests were selected for a pilot application. The scores generated from answers corrected by two researchers were submitted to statistical analyses to assess content complexity equivalence. Participants underperformed in the SJT, suggesting learning gaps in the assessed social skills. There were no significant differences in scoring, confirming the content complexity equivalence among different situations. The administration of these SJTs has the potential to enhance resident education and interprofessional health training, fostering socio-affective interactions within collaborative work contexts.

show abstract

“…CPAT is acceptable for use in many different clinical settings, such as primary and community care [ 29 , 33 ], mental health [ 23 ], chronic disease management [ 28 ], health professionals postgraduate training [ 24 ], patient safety [ 30 ], and patient satisfaction [ 32 ]. Despite its lengthy scale consisting of 56 items, the CPAT is recommended as the best instrument for measuring interprofessional collaboration for teamwork [ 34 ]. All of these studies included health professionals as participants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Australian Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool

Ardyansyah,

Cordier,

Brewer

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives This study aimed to validate the Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool (CPAT) in the Australian setting and provide a quality instrument in terms of psychometric properties that can be used to measure interprofessional outcomes for both healthcare practitioners and students. The outcomes evaluated include the capacity to work in an interprofessional team, good interprofessional communication skills, leadership skills, ensuring clear division of tasks and roles in a team, effective conflict management, and being actively involved with patients and their families/communities in care. Methods The COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) taxonomy and standards were used as guides for evaluating the psychometric properties of the Australian CPAT, which include evaluations regarding instrument development requirements of sample target and size, content validity, internal structure (structural validity, internal consistency reliability and measurement invariance), and hypotheses testing. CPAT Australia was developed through two stages involving pilot studies and a validation study, both of which included healthcare practitioners and students as participants. A pilot study examined content validity regarding item relevance, item comprehensibility, and instrument comprehensiveness. The validation study was carried out to assess the internal structure of CPAT Australia for aspects of structural validity, internal consistency reliabilities, and configural, metric and scalar measurement invariance. The structural validity was explored using the following three steps: exploratory, confirmatory, and multi-group factor analysis. Construct validity was evaluated to confirm direct and indirect paths of assumptions based on a previously validated model. Data collected between August 2021 and May 2022. Results The content validity evaluation confirmed that all items were relevant, understandable and comprehensive for measuring interprofessional collaborative care in Australia. Three hundred ninety-nine participants contributed to the validation study (n=152 practitioners; n=247 students). The original instrument model of 8-Factor 56-Item was improved in the Australian CPAT. Two items, Item 27 (Physicians assume the ultimate responsibility) and Item 49 (Final decision rest with the physician), were consistently rejected and therefore discarded. The internal structure of the 7-Factor 54-Item solution was confirmed as a suitable model with fit indices meeting COSMIN standards for a good model in practitioner and student cohorts. Configural, metric and scalar invariances were confirmed, indicating the invariance of the instruments when used for the practitioner and student cohorts. The construct validity evaluation indicated that 81.3% of direct and indirect assumptions were accepted, fulfilling the COSMIN requirement of >75% of proposed assumptions being accepted. Conclusion The Australian CPAT with a 7-factor 54-item solution was confirmed as a quality measure for assessing interprofessional education and collaborative practice for both healthcare practitioners and students in Australia with robust psychometric properties.

show abstract

Interdisciplinary Health Care Evaluation Instruments: A Review of Psychometric Evidence

Cited by 5 publications

References 61 publications

Reliability and validity of the Taiwanese version of the collaborative practice assessment tool: A pilot study

Reliability and validity of the Taiwanese version of the collaborative practice assessment tool: A pilot study

Development of Situational Judgment Tests in Interprofessional Health Education

An evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Australian Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About