English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Introduction: Assessment of interprofessional learning (IPL) in practice is a key educational strategy. Especially, interprofessional collaboration in a conference is reasonable to assess interprofessional competency because we have many conferences for sharing information and coping with complex issues interprofessionally in practice. This study aimed to validity evidence supporting the IPL assessment scores, namely the Interprofessional Performance Scale in Conference (IPSC), and to evaluate its reliability. Methods: As a content validity, to obtain a consensus concerning the IPSC, we held five workshops from June 2016 to January 2018. Covering a response process, healthcare professional participants (raters) assessed interprofessional performance using the developed IPSC by watching 3 different types of videos of case conferences, with 5 healthcare professionals participating in each. Rater agreement for the response process among six different raters was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Concerning internal structure, we examined the descriptive statistics and one-way analysis of variance as well as Generalizability (G) and Decision (D) studies. We explored the consequences of the IPSC through feedback sheet. Result:The finalized IPSC assessment consisted of 12 items with 4-point Likert scales. ICC was 0.45 for the overall score. The association between IPSC and videos was significant while that of IPSC and professionals was not. The G and phi coefficients were 0.86 and 0.84, respectively. In descending order, the portion of the variance was professionals (15.7%) and the interaction of professionals and raters (11.5%) of the total variance. As D study, to reach a phi coefficient of 0.80, seven items and five raters were required. Through assessing interprofessional performance in case conferences, we clarified participants could reflect their own interprofessional competency as a consequence of the IPSC. Conclusion:Findings from this study support using the IPSC as a tool to make consistent assessments of interprofessional performance in conferences.

Validity Evidence for Interprofessional Performance Scale in Conference (IPSC) in Japan