中华医学教育杂志

中华医学教育杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (2): 141-145.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20241012-01063

• 医学教育评估 • 上一篇    下一篇

中医学“5+3”一体化学生住院医师规范化培训阶段临床能力评价指标体系构建

钱丝诗1, 赵涵琪2, 康睿2, 李勇3, 胡一梅1   

  1. 1成都中医药大学教务处,成都 611100;
    2成都中医药大学管理学院,成都 611100;
    3成都中医药大学高教研究与质量评价中心,成都 611100
  • 收稿日期:2024-10-12 出版日期:2026-02-01 发布日期:2026-01-30
  • 通讯作者: 胡一梅, Email: 790960646@qq.com

Study on the construction of clinical ability evaluation index system for traditional Chinese medicine students of ″5+3″ integrated program during standardized residency training

Qian Sishi1, Zhao Hanqi2, Kang Rui2, Li Yong3, Hu Yimei1   

  1. 1Department of Academic Affairs, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu 611100, China;
    2School of Management, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu 611100, China;
    3Higher Education Research and Quality Evaluation Center, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu 611100, China
  • Received:2024-10-12 Online:2026-02-01 Published:2026-01-30
  • Contact: Hu Yimei, Email: 790960646@qq.com

PDF (PC)

5

摘要： 目的 基于米勒金字塔模型构建中医学“5+3”一体化学生在住院医师规范化培训(简称住培)阶段的临床能力评价指标体系。方法 2023年12月,以米勒临床能力金字塔模型为理论基础,通过文献分析法、半结构化访谈法初步确立评价体系指标。2024年1至3月,采用德尔菲法对13名专家完成2轮专家函询,采用优序图法和百分权重法确立指标权重。结果 2轮专家函询均回收全部问卷13份,专家积极性较高;专家权威系数分别为0.94、0.97;肯德尔协调系数分别为0.284、0.308(均P＜0.001);最终确立包括中医学专业理论知识、知识应用能力、临床操作表现、职业综合能力4个一级指标、20个二级指标、52个评价要素的中医学“5+3”一体化学生住培阶段临床能力评价指标体系。结论 本研究构建的评价指标体系能够反映中医学“5+3”一体化学生在住培阶段的临床能力特点,具有科学性与实用性,可以为住培阶段开展学生临床能力评价提供一定参考。

关键词: 评价研究, 中医学, “5+3”一体化, 住院医师规范化培训, 临床能力, 评价指标体系

Abstract: Objective To construct an evaluation index system for the clinical ability of students in the ″5+3″ integrated program of traditional Chinese medicine during the standardized residency training (hereafter referred to as residency training) stage based on the Miller pyramid model. Methods In December 2023, based on the Miller Clinical Competency Pyramid model as the theoretical foundation, the evaluation system indicators were initially established through literature analysis and semi-structured interview methods. From January to March 2024, the Delphi method was used to conduct two rounds of expert consultations with 13 experts. The priority graph method and the percentage weight method were adopted to establish the index weights. Results All 13 questionnaires were collected in both rounds of expert inquiries, indicating a high level of enthusiasm among the experts. The expert authority coefficients were 0.940 and 0.970 respectively. The Kendall′s Concordia coefficients were 0.284 and 0.308 respectively (all P<0.001); Finally, an evaluation index system for the clinical ability of eight-year students in traditional Chinese medicine during the residency training stage was established, which includes four first-level indicators: theoretical knowledge of traditional Chinese medicine, knowledge application ability, clinical operation performance, and comprehensive vocational ability, 20 second-level indicators, and 52 evaluation elements. Conclusions The evaluation index system constructed in this study can reflect the clinical ability characteristics of students in the ″5+3″ integrated program of traditional Chinese medicine during the residency training stage. It is scientific and practical, and can provide empirical references for the quality evaluation of students′ clinical abilities during the residency training stage.

Key words: Evaluation studies, Traditional Chinese medicine, ″5+3″ integration, Standardized residency training, Clinical ability, Evaluation index system