作者: Dietrich Stoevesandt , Christiane Luderer , Matthias Donat , Ute Baum , Angelika Kirsten
DOI: 10.3205/ZMA001110
关键词: Teamwork 、 Nursing 、 Cognition 、 Human medicine 、 Test quality 、 Identity (social science) 、 German 、 Scale (social sciences) 、 Psychology 、 Reliability (statistics)
摘要: Objective: In order to verify the methodological quality of two versions a tool for measuring attitudes towards interprofessional learning, we adapted - in terms translation and scale form Heidelberg Version [1] Readiness Interprofessional Learning Scale RIPLS [2], methodologically controversial that had been translated into German, compared both original new versions. Method: Three items were reworded altered (from five four levels), leading Halle was validated by means cognitive pretest (n=6). Both questionnaires completed students taking degree program Health Nursing Sciences (HNS) Human Medicine. The test tools examined analyzing main components reliability using scales allocation as according Parsell Bligh [2]. Results: randomly assembled distributed 331 students. response n=320 (HNS n=109; Medicine n=211). "RIPLS-HAL" questionnaire n=166 "RIPLS-HDB" n=154. component analysis data could not depict patterns Australian tool. values only satisfactory "Teamwork Collaboration" "Professional Identity" scales. Conclusions: German version has limited suitability recording attitude learning. present can be regarded an approach developing more suitable