中华医学教育杂志

中华医学教育杂志 ›› 2019, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (12): 970-973.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-677X.2019.12.019

• 医学教育评估 • 上一篇    下一篇

德尔菲法在中国临床医学教育中应用的系统评价

李姝1, 马青变1, 谷士贤2   

  1. 1北京大学第三医院急诊科 100191;
    2北京大学第三医院教育处 100191
  • 收稿日期:2019-04-22 出版日期:2019-12-01 发布日期:2020-12-09
  • 通讯作者: 马青变,Email:maqingbian@bjmu.edu.cn,电话:15611908229
  • 基金资助:
    北京大学医学部研究生专业课课程体系建设项目(北医[2018]部研字84号)

Systematic review of the Delphi method application in clinical medical education of China

Li Shu1, Ma Qingbian1, Gu Shixian2   

  1. 1Department of Emergency Medicine,Peking University Third Hospital,Beijing 100191,China;
    2Office of Educational Administration,Peking University Third Hospital,Beijing 100191,China
  • Received:2019-04-22 Online:2019-12-01 Published:2020-12-09
  • Contact: Ma Qingbian,Email:maqingbian@bjmu.edu.cn,Tel:0086-15611908229

PDF (PC)

34

摘要： 目的 系统评价德尔菲法在中国临床医学教育中的应用,了解德尔菲法的实施现状,提出改进建议。方法 采取系统评价的方法,搜索截至2019年2月28日中国知网和Medline数据库文献。通过阅读全文提取研究设计、问卷过程、专家资质、结果报告并进行统计。结果 35项研究达到入选标准。专家大多为10年以上从业年限,首轮应答率超过80.0%;34项研究进行了意见强度分级;多数研究进行了意见集中程度、协调程度分析。但40.0%(14/35)的研究未定义指标筛选标准;77.1%(27/35)的研究无反馈;97.1%(34/35)的研究未定义达到共识的量化标准。结论 德尔菲法在中国临床医学教育领域中的实施过程存在较大差异,细节有待规范。

关键词: 德尔菲法, 临床医学, 医学教育, 应用, 系统评价

Abstract: Objective To analyze the application of Delphi method in clinical medical education in China,to get acknowledge of the current status of implementation,to obtain the quality of research,and to propose improvements.Methods A systematic review was implemented to search the literature in China National Knowledge Infrastructure and MEDLINE database before February 28,2019.The study design,questionnaire process,expert qualifications,results report and statistics were extracted by reading full text.Results All 35 studies met the inclusion criteria.Almost all of the experts had more than 10 years of experience.The response rates of first rounds were all above 80.0%.All 34 studies had ranked opinion intensity;most studies conducted an analysis of the degree of concentration and coordination.However,40.0%(14/35) of studies did not define screening criteria;77.1%(27/35)of studies did not give feedback;97.1%(34/35)of the studies did not define quantitative criteria of consensus.Conclusions The process of Delphi method in the field of clinical medical education in China needs to be further standardized.

Key words: Delphi method, Clinical medicine, Medical education, Application, Systematic review

中图分类号: