目的 构建并实践基于基本要素分析(primary trait analysis,PTA)量表的医学功能学实验报告评价体系,为实验教学科学化评价提供参考。方法 通过文献分析初步拟定评价框架,经过23名专家2轮德尔菲法咨询筛选指标,结合层次分析法确定指标权重。以上海交通大学医学院2022级五年制临床医学专业27名学生的实验报告为评价样本,分别采用PTA量表法(PTA组)与传统方法(对照组)评价,比较应用效果。结果 2轮专家咨询的有效问卷回收率均为100.0%,专家权威系数分别为0.86和0.92,Kendall协调系数分别为0.265和0.334(均P<0.001),最终形成包含3个一级指标(基础实验能力、科学思维、学术规范)、8个二级指标和21个三级指标的评价体系。实证研究表明,PTA组实验报告成绩的四分位数间距(interquartile range,IQR)大于对照组,可有效区分不同能力层次的学生,并识别学生的薄弱环节。结论 基于PTA量表的医学功能学实验报告评价体系兼具科学性与实用性,契合形成性评价的教学导向,可以为医学实验教学的精准化评价改革提供范式。
Objective To construct and implement an evaluation system for medical functional experiment reports based on the primary trait analysis (PTA) scale, and to inform the scientific evaluation of experimental teaching. Methods A preliminary evaluation framework was developed through literature analysis. Indicators were screened via two rounds of Delphi expert consultation involving 23 experts, and indicator weights were determined using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Experimental reports from 27 students enrolled in the 2022 cohort of the five-year clinical medicine program at Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine were used as the evaluation sample. The reports were assessed using both the PTA scale method (PTA group) and the traditional method (control group), and the application effects were compared. Results The effective questionnaire recovery rate for both rounds of expert consultation was 100.0%. The expert authority coefficients were 0.86 and 0.92, and Kendall's coefficients of concordance were 0.265 and 0.334 (all P<0.001), respectively. The final evaluation system comprised 3 first-level indicators (Basic Experimental Ability, Scientific Thinking, Academic Norms), 8 second-level indicators, and 21 third-level indicators. Empirical research showed that theinterquartile range (IQR) of scores in the PTA group was greater than that in the control group, enabling better differentiation of students' ability levels and identification of their weaknesses. Conclusions The PTA scale-based evaluation system for medical functional experiment reports is both scientific and practical. It aligns with the teaching orientation of formative evaluation and provides a paradigm for the precision evaluation reform of medical experimental teaching.
[1] 李稻. 功能学科实验教程[M]. 2版.北京:人民卫生出版社, 2015:1-2.
[2]徐静,孙艺平,刘克敏,等. 能力培养的机能学实验教学体系探索与实践[J]. 实验室研究与探索,2019,38(7):136-138,172. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7167.2019.07.031.
[3] 蔡英兰,姜京植.能力培养为导向的医学模块化教学模式探索[J].教育教学论坛,2024 (23):149-152.
[4] 余立华, 卢占英, 刘芳, 等. 医学机能学实验考核评价体系探索[J].基础医学教育,2020,22(1):50-55. DOI: 10.13754/j.issn2095-1450.2020.01.17.
[5] 国务院.深化新时代教育评价改革总体方案[EB/OL]. (2020-10-13)[2023-08-20]. http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2020-10/13/content_5551032.htm.
[6] Sheehe JB, Schoener L. Primary trait analysis: student, course, and program assessment[J]. Nurse Educ, 2009,34(3):114-117. DOI: 10.1097/NNE.0b013e31819fca9d.
[7] AlsardaryS , Pontiggia L , Hamid M ,et al.Primary trait analysis to assess a learner-centered, upper-level mathematics course[J].Primus, 2011, 21(4):303-315.DOI:10.1080/10511970903043755.
[8] 丁成明, 谢翼, 陈国栋, 等. 基于PTA量表法的医学生临床思维能力评估量表的研究[J].中华养生保健,2023,41(15):1-4. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-8011.2023.15.001.
[9] 金京生, 张策. 基于PTA量表的科学探究能力评价——以“铁粉、氧化铜混合物与足量稀硫酸反应的先后顺序”的实验探究为例[J].化学教与学,2022(5):8-13,60. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-0546.2022.05.002.
[10] 杨鲜梅,陆红,何正平,等. 基于评价量规的实验报告新评估模式[J]. 高校生物学教学研究(电子版),2019,9(3):37-42. DOI:10.3868/j.issn2095-1574.2019.03.009.
[11] 凌云云, 冯志君. PTA量表法在高等医学院校化学实验报告评价中的运用初探[J].齐齐哈尔医学院学报,2020,41(3):335-337. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1256.2020.03.028.
[12] 中国病理生理学会机能实验教学工作委员会, 范小芳, 金宏波, 等. 机能学实验教学专家共识[J].基础医学教育,2023,25(12):1017-1023. DOI: 10.13754/j.issn2095-1450.2023.12.01.
[13] Romero-Collado A. Essential elements to elaborate a study with the (e)Delphi method[J]. Enferm Intensiva (Engl Ed), 2021,32(2):100-104. DOI: 10.1016/j.enfi.2020.09.001.
[14] Stratton SJ. Purposeful sampling: advantages and pitfalls[J]. Prehosp Disaster Med, 2024,39(2):121-122. DOI: 10.1017/S1049023X24000281.
[15] Joshi A, Kale S, Chandel S, et al. Likert Scale: explored and explained[J].British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 2015, 7(4):396-403.DOI:10.9734/BJAST/2015/14975.
[16]王佳玉,史霆,徐玲玲. 基于Delphi-AHP法构建医学情境模拟课程实施质量评价工具的探索[J].中华医学教育杂志,2025,45(3):235-240.DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20240116-00058.
[17] Ye J, Tao W, Yang L, et al. Developing core competencies for clinical nurse educators: an e-Delphi-study[J]. Nurse Educ Today, 2022,109:105217. DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105217.
[18] Zhang C, Ma EL, Liu BL, et al. Framework development for clinical comprehensive evaluation of drugs-a study protocol using the Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process[J]. Front Pharmacol, 2022,13:869319. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.869319.
[19] 侯菁媛, 钱文溢, 王萱萱, 等. 基于成果导向教育理念的医学院校学生评教指标体系构建研究[J].中华医学教育杂志,2024,44(6):454-457. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20231031-00421.
[20] 张敏,陆媛,高松,等. 基于Delphi法的社区人群轻度认知障碍疾病认知问卷编制研究[J]. 中国全科医学,2024,27(16):1990-1997. DOI:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2023.0589.
[21] 杨世艳, 李欣, 王一飞. 基于德尔菲法和层次分析法的结节性痒疹核心量表集筛选及权重确定[J].中国中西医结合皮肤性病学杂志,2025,24(5):403-409. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-0709.2025.05.005.
[22]He Z, Feng H, Zhang J, et al. Two decades of development in medical functional experimental science in China: faculty perspectives from a cross-sectional study[J]. BMC Med Educ, 2025,25(1):832. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-025-07382-6.
[23]王维民. 第四代医学教育的深度剖析与实施策略[J].中华医学教育杂志,2024,44(10):721-725. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20240722-00766.
[24] 王会,袁诗龙. 高等教育课程形成性评价理论与实践[J]. 淮北职业技术学院学报,2024,23(1):47-50.
