Tıp Öğrencilerinin Profesyonelizme Yönelik Tutumlarının Değerlendirilmesi: Ölçek Uyarlama Çalışması

Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı, Pensilvanya Eyalet Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi (PSCOM) tarafından geliştirilen “Profesyonelizm Ölçeği - Öğrenci Formu”nu Türkçe’ye uyarlamak, geçerlik ve güvenirliliğini analiz etmek ve ölçek puanlarının eğitim dönemlerine ve cinsiyete göre farklılığını test etmektir. Gereç ve yöntem: PSCOM Profesyonelizm Ölçeği Öğrenci Formunun iki yönlü çevirisi yapılarak Türkçe versiyonu geliştirilmiş ve ön uygulaması yapılmıştır. Ölçek, Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi’nde 2014 yılında toplam 517, 1-6 sınıf öğrencilerine uygulanmıştır. Ölçeğin geçerliliğini test etmek için doğrulayıcı faktör analizi yapılmış, iç tutarlılığı Cronbach alfa kaysayısı ile değerlendirilmiştir. Ölçeğin alt boyutlarının faktör puanları cinsiyete ve eğitim dönemlerine göre karşılaştırılmıştır. Bulgular: Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi, bir madde dışında orjinal ölçeğin alt boyutları ile uyumluluk göstermiştir. Alt boyutların iç tutarlılık katsayıları 0,469 ve 0,761 arasında belirlenmiştir. Eğitim dönemlerine göre dört alt boyutta, cinsiyete göre tüm alt boyutlarda istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık gözlenmiştir. Sonuç: PSCOM Profesyonelizm Ölçeği Öğrenci Formu Türkçe versiyonu, Türkiye’de tıp fakültelerinde tıp eğitiminde öğrencilerin profesyonelizm tutumlarını değerlendirmek amacıyla kullanılabilir.

Assessment of Attitudes of Students of Medicine towards Professionalism: Scale Adaptation Work

Objective: The objective of the study is to adapt for Turkey the “Scale of Professionalism- Student Form” developed by the Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine (PSCOM), analyse its validity and reliability and to test the variance of scale scores with respect to school terms and gender. Materials and Method: The PSCOM “Scale of Professionalism-Student Form” was translated, its Turkish version was developed and a preliminary test was made. The scale was applied to 517 students from the 1st to 6th grade of the Faculty of Medicine, Ankara University in 2014. Confirmatory factor analysis was made to test the validity of the scale and its reliability was assessed by using Cronbach alpha coefficient. Factor scores in subcale of the scale were compared by gender and terms in education. Findings: Confirmatory factor analysis yielded consistency with the lower dimensions of the original scale with the exception of one item. Internal consistency coefficients of lower dimensions were found to be in the interval 0.469-0.761. Statistically significant differences were observed in 4 lower dimensions with respect to periods in education and in all lower dimensions with respect to gender. Conclusion: The Turkish version of PSCOM Scale of Professionalism-Student Form can be used in Medical Schools in Turkey to assess the attitudes of students in terms of professionalism.

___

  • 1. Misch DA. Androgogy and medical education: Are medical students internally motivated to learn? Adv Health Sci Educ 2002; 7(2): 153-60.
  • 2. Simpson JG, Furnace J, Crosby J & friends (The Scottish Deans’ Medical Curriculum Group). “The Scottish doctor – Learning outcomes for the medical undergraduate in Scotland: A Foundation for compotent and reflective practitioners”. Med Teach 2002; Vol. 24, No.2: 136-43.
  • 3. Institute for International Medical Education. Global minumum essential requirements in medical education. Med Teach 2002; Vol. 24, No. 2: 130-5.
  • 4. Matveevskii A, Moore DL, Samuels PJ. Competency and professionalism in medicine. Clin Teach 2012 Apr; 9(2): 75-9.
  • 5. Frank JR, Snell LS, Sherbino J. (Editörler). The Draft CanMEDS 2015 milestones guide. 2014. http://www.royalcollege.ca/portal/page/ portal/rc/common/documents/ canmeds/framework/framework_series_ 1_e.pdf (downloaded 24.12.2014)
  • 6. Project of the ABIM Foundation, ACP-ASIM Foundation & European Federation of Internal Medicine. Medical professionalism in the new millennium: A physician Charter. Ann Intern Med 2002; Vol 136, No 3: 243-6.
  • 7. Hilton S, Southgate L. Professionalism in medical education. Teach Teach Educ 2007; 23: 265-79.
  • 8. Passi V, Doug M, Peile E, Thislethwaite J, Johnson N. Developing medical professionalism in future doctors: a systematic review. Int J Med Educ 2010; 1: 19-29.
  • 9. O’Sullivan H, van Mook W, Fewtrell R, Wass V. Integrating professionalism into the curriculum: AMEE Guide No.61. Med Teach 2012; 34(2): 64-77.
  • 10. Wear D, Castellani B. The Development of professionalism: curriculum matters. Acad Med 2000; 75(6): 602-11.
  • 11. Howe A. Professional development in undergraduate medical curricula – the key to the door of new culture? Med Educ 2002; 36(4): 353-9.
  • 12. Karneieli-Miller O, Vu TR, Holtman MC, Clyman SG, Inui TS. Medical students’ professionalism narratives: A window on the informal and hidden curriculum. Acad Med 201; Vol 85, No 1: 124-33.
  • 13. Brosnan C, Turner BS, (Eds.). Handbook of the sociology of medical education. USA: Taylor & Francis Group; 2009.
  • 14. Chandratilake M, McAleer S, Gibson J. Culturel similarities and differences in medical professionalism: A multi-region study. Med Educ 2012; 46(3): 257-66.
  • 15. Jha V, McLean M, Gibbs TJ, Sandars J. Medical professionalism across cultures: a challenge form medicine and medical education. Med Teach 2015; 37(1): 74-80.
  • 16. Blackall GF, Melnick SA, Shoop GH, George J, Lerner SM, Wilson PK, Pees RC, Kreher M. Professionalism in medical education: The Development and validation of a survey instrument to assess attitudes toward professionalism. Med Teach 2007; 29(2-3): e58-62.
  • 17. Şimşek ÖF. Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş Temel İlkeler ve LISREL Uygulamaları. İstanbul: Ekinoks; 2007.
  • 18. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus User’s Guide 5th ed. Los Angeles: CA; 1998-2007. http://www.statmodel.com/download/ usersguide/Mplus Users Guide v5.pdf.
  • 19. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951; 16: 297-334.
  • 20. Cruess SR, Cruess RL. Understanding medical professionalism: A plea for an inclusive and integrated approach. Med Educ 2008; 42(8): 755-7.
  • 21. Byszewski A, Hendelman W, McGuinty C, Moineau G. Wanted: Rol models – medical students’ perceptions of professionalism. BMC Med Educ 2012 Nov 15; 12: 115.
  • 22. Nhan VT, Violato C, An PL, Beran TN. Cross- cultural construct validity study of professionalism of Vietnamese medical students. Teach Learn Med 2014; 26(1): 72- 80.
  • 23. Tsai TC, Lin CH, Harasym PH, Violato C. Students’ perception on medical professionalism: The psychometric perspective. Med Teach 2007; 29(2-3): 128-34.
  • 24. Blue AV, Crandall S, Nowacek G, Luecht R, Chauvin S, Swick H. Assesment of matriculating medical students’ knowledge and attitudes towards professionalism. Med Teach 2009; 31(10): 928-32.
  • 25. Jiang S, Yan Z, Xie X, Tan W, Lu F, He J. Initial knowledge of medical professionalism among Chinese medical students. Med Teach 2010; 32(12): 961-70.
  • 26. Finn G, Garner J, Sawdon M. ‘You’re judged all the time!’ Students’ views on professionalism: a multicentre study. Med Educ 2010; 44(8): 814-25.
  • 27. Borgstrom E, Cohn S, Barclay S. Medical professionalism: conflicting values for tomorrow’s doctors. J Gen Intern Med 2010; 25(12): 1330-6.
  • 28. Baingana R, Nakasujja N, Galukande M, Omona K, Mafigir DK. Learning health professionalism at Makerere University: an exploratory study amongst undergraduate students. BMC Med Educ 2010 Nov 4; 10: 76.
  • 29. Adkoli BV, Al-Umran KU, Al-Sheikh M, Deepak KK, Al-Rubaish AM. Medical students’ perception of professionalism: A qualitative study from Saudi Arabia. Med Teach 2011; 33(10): 840-5.
  • 30. Monrouxe LV, Rees CE, Hu W. Differences in medical students’ explicit discourses of professionalism: acting, representing, becoming. Med Educ 2011; 45(6): 585-602.
  • 31. Hurtwitz S, Kelly B, Powis D, Smyth R, Lewin T. The desirable qualities of future doctors – A study of medical student perceptions. Med Teach 2013; 35(7): e1332-9.
  • 32. Oğuz YN, Tepe H, Örnek-Büken N, Kırımsoy- Kucur D. Biyoetik terimleri sözlüğü. Ankara: Türkiye Felsefe Kurumu; 2005.