Validity of the scan of postgraduate educational environment domains (SPEED) questionnaire in a rural general practice training setting.
GP registrars
Quality of educational environment
Rural postgraduate GP training
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 Jan 2019
17 Jan 2019
Historique:
received:
22
10
2018
accepted:
04
01
2019
entrez:
19
1
2019
pubmed:
19
1
2019
medline:
14
6
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The educational environment is critical to learning and is determined by social interactions. Trainee satisfaction translates to career commitment, retention and a positive professional attitude as well as being an important factor in assessing the impact of the training program. This study aimed to validate the Scan of Postgraduate Educational Environment Domain (SPEED) tool and assess its appropriateness in evaluating the quality of General Practice (GP) rural postgraduate educational environment. A questionnaire containing the 15-item SPEED tool was administered to GP registrars to examine their perceptions of the educational environment. Principal component analysis (PCA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were used to gather evidences of the validity of the instrument based on its internal structure. Additional validity evidence and reliability estimates were obtained using many-facet Rasch model analysis (MFRM). The survey was completed by 351 registrars with a response rate of 60%. Parallel analysis performed using principal component analysis and exploratory factor analysis suggests that the SPEED tool is unidimensional. The MFRM analysis demonstrated an excellent degree of infit and outfit for items and training sites, but not for persons. The MFRM analysis also estimated high reliability levels for items (0.98), training sites (0.95) and persons within training sites (ranging from 0.87 to 0.93 in each training sites). Overall, the registrars agreed that the educational environment had high quality, with most (13 out of 15) of the items rated above 4 out of 5. This study demonstrated a high degree of validity and reliability of the SPEED tool for the measurement of the quality of the educational environment in a rural postgraduate GP training context. However, when applied in a new setting, the tool may not function as a multidimensional tool consistent with its theoretical grounding.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The educational environment is critical to learning and is determined by social interactions. Trainee satisfaction translates to career commitment, retention and a positive professional attitude as well as being an important factor in assessing the impact of the training program. This study aimed to validate the Scan of Postgraduate Educational Environment Domain (SPEED) tool and assess its appropriateness in evaluating the quality of General Practice (GP) rural postgraduate educational environment.
METHODS
METHODS
A questionnaire containing the 15-item SPEED tool was administered to GP registrars to examine their perceptions of the educational environment. Principal component analysis (PCA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were used to gather evidences of the validity of the instrument based on its internal structure. Additional validity evidence and reliability estimates were obtained using many-facet Rasch model analysis (MFRM).
RESULTS
RESULTS
The survey was completed by 351 registrars with a response rate of 60%. Parallel analysis performed using principal component analysis and exploratory factor analysis suggests that the SPEED tool is unidimensional. The MFRM analysis demonstrated an excellent degree of infit and outfit for items and training sites, but not for persons. The MFRM analysis also estimated high reliability levels for items (0.98), training sites (0.95) and persons within training sites (ranging from 0.87 to 0.93 in each training sites). Overall, the registrars agreed that the educational environment had high quality, with most (13 out of 15) of the items rated above 4 out of 5.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrated a high degree of validity and reliability of the SPEED tool for the measurement of the quality of the educational environment in a rural postgraduate GP training context. However, when applied in a new setting, the tool may not function as a multidimensional tool consistent with its theoretical grounding.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30654772
doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1455-8
pii: 10.1186/s12909-019-1455-8
pmc: PMC6337755
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
25Références
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2000 Mar;104(1):1-15
pubmed: 10769936
Med Teach. 2001 Jul;23(4):337-344
pubmed: 12098379
Med Teach. 2001 Oct;23(6):610-612
pubmed: 12098485
BMJ. 2003 Apr 12;326(7393):810-2
pubmed: 12689981
Med Educ. 2003 Sep;37(9):809-14
pubmed: 12950945
Med Teach. 2004 May;26(3):260-4
pubmed: 15203505
BMC Med Educ. 2004 Aug 06;4:12
pubmed: 15298710
Acad Med. 2005 Mar;80(3):266-78
pubmed: 15734809
Med Teach. 2005 Jun;27(4):326-31
pubmed: 16024415
Med Teach. 2005 Jun;27(4):338-42
pubmed: 16024417
Br J Educ Psychol. 2005 Dec;75(Pt 4):645-60
pubmed: 16318683
Med Educ. 2007 Jan;41(1):92-9
pubmed: 17209897
Acad Med. 2008 Jun;83(6):611-20
pubmed: 18520472
Am J Pharm Educ. 2009 Feb 19;73(1):9
pubmed: 19513146
Med Teach. 2010;32(2):161-3
pubmed: 20163233
Med J Aust. 2011 May 16;194(10):495-6
pubmed: 21644889
CJEM. 2011 Jul;13(4):259-66
pubmed: 21722555
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2012 Dec;17(5):727-42
pubmed: 22307806
J Grad Med Educ. 2012 Dec;4(4):472-8
pubmed: 24294424
Arch Iran Med. 2014 May;17(5):372-7
pubmed: 24784868
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 28;10(9):e0137872
pubmed: 26413836
BMC Res Notes. 2015 Nov 30;8:734
pubmed: 26619841
Med Teach. 1986;8(2):111-24
pubmed: 3762357
Phys Ther. 1998 Jun;78(6):635-45
pubmed: 9626275
Am J Surg. 1998 Jul;176(1):46-8
pubmed: 9683132