Journal of Isfahan Medical School

Journal of Isfahan Medical School

Quality of Clinical Teaching in Residency Training: Determining the Validity and Reliability of the EFFECT Questionnaire in Iran

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors
Arash Najimi 1
Hosein Akbari-Aghdam 2
Reza Bakhtiary-Moghaddam 3
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Medical Education, Medical Education Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3 School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
10.48305/jims.v40.i663.0152
Abstract
Background: One of the most important determinant, affecting the quality of a proper evaluation is the availability of an effective instrument that can precisely assess the target goals. A systematic review showed that instruments available so far, do not comprehensively cover all domains of clinical teaching. This study aimed to determine the validity and reliability of the Iranian version of EFFECT questionnaire in the society of medical residents of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. This instrument was designed and validated at the Radboud University Medical Centre in the Netherland.
Methods: Data was virtually collected between the years 2018-2019. A team of three relevant experts was present to determine the formal validity. Content validation was also performed by 10 experts in 3 domain of simplicity, relevance and clarity. To determine the validity of the instrument, 100 questionnaires were completed by residents from 10 different disciplines and confirmatory factor analysis was performed. The reliability of the items was assessed by Cronbach's alpha.
Findings: Content validity was confirmed in two stages by teams of 3 and 10 experts from the respective specialist fields. The confirmatory factor analysis model shows that the relevant indicators and questions are at an acceptable level of competence. Structural equation modeling also shows that none of the questions are removed from the model. Cronbach's alpha of variables was calculated to be greater than 0.8 for the instrument and its domains.
Conclusion: This study shows that the Iranian version of the EFFECT questionnaire is valid and reliable and can be used to assess the quality of clinical teaching in residency training in Iran.
Keywords
Reproducibility of Results
EFFECT
Teaching Rounds
Internship and Residency
  1. Fluit CRMG, Bolhuis S, Grol R, Laan R, Wensing M. Assessing the quality of clinical teachers: A systematic review of content and quality of questionnaires for assessing clinical teachers. J Gen Int Med 2010; 25(12): 137-45.
  2. Yousefy A, Changiz T, Yamani N, Zahrai RH,
    Ehsanpour S. Developing a holistic accreditation system for medical universities of the Islamic Republic of Iran. East Mediterr Health J 2009; 15(3): 747-6.
  3. Tootoonchi M, Yamani N, Changiz T, Yousefy A. Research priorities in medical education: A national study. J Res Med Sci 2012; 17(1): 83-91.
  4. Bolhuis S. Professional development between teachers’ practical knowledge and external demands: plea for a broad social-constructivist and critical approach. In: Oser FK, Achtenwagen F, Renold U, editors. Competence oriented teacher training. Old research demands and new pathways. Rotterdam, Tapei: Sense Publishers. 2006; p. 235-49.
  5. Cheetham G, Chivers G. How professionals learn: an investigation of informal learning amongst people working in professions. J Eur Ind Train 2001; 25(5): 248-92.
  6. Yamani N, Moosavi SA, Alizadeh M, Khorvash F, Ghiasi MA. 360-degree performance evaluation of emergency medicine ward in Alzahra Hospital. J Pak Med Assoc 2012; 62(3 Suppl 2): S13-7.
  7. Stalmeijer RE, Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen IH, Muijtjens AM, Scherpbier AJ. The Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (MCTQ) as a valid and reliable instrument for the evaluation of clinical teachers. Acad Med 2010; 85(11): 1732-8.
  8. Snell L, Tallett S, Haist S, Hays R, Norcini J, Prince K. A review of the evaluation of clinical teaching: new perspectives and challenges. Med Educ 2000; 34(10): 862-70.
  9. Teunissen PW, Scheele F, Scherpbier AJ, Van der Vleuten C, Boor K, van Luijk SJ. How residents learn: qualitative evidence for the pivotal role of clinical activities. Med Educ 2007; 41(8): 763-70.
  10. Scheele F, Teunissen P, van Luijk S, Heineman E,
    Fluit L, Mulder H. Introducing competencybased postgraduate medical education in the Netherlands. Med Teach 2008; 30(3): 248-53.
  11. Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen HA, Gerver WJ, de Grave W, Scherpbier AJ. Providing physicians with feedback on how they supervise students during patient contacts. Med Teach 2004; 26(5): 409-14.
  12. Stalmeijer RE, Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen IH, Muijtjens AM, Scherpbier AJ. The development of an instrument for evaluating clinical teachers: involving stakeholders to determine content validity. Med Teach 2008; 30(8): e272-7.
  13. Fluit C, Bolhuis S, Grol R, Ham M, Feskens R, Laan R, et al. Evaluation and feedback for effective clinical teaching in postgraduate medical education: validation of an assessment instrument incorporating the CanMEDS roles. Med Teach 2012; 34(11): 893-901.
  14. Frank JR, Danoff D. The CanMEDS initiative: implementing an outcomes-based framework of physician competencies. Med Teach 2007; 29(7): 642-7.
  15. Bentler PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull 1990; 107(2): 238-46.
  16. Burns N, Groves S. Understanding nursing research. 3rd Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2002.
  17. Vaižgėlienė E, Padaiga Ž, Rastenytė D, Tamelis A, Petrikonis K, Kregždytė R, et al. Validation of the EFFECT questionnaire for competence-based clinical teaching in residency training in Lithuania. Medicina (Kaunas) 2017; 53(3): 173-8.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 40, Issue 663
3rd Week, May
May and June 2022
Pages 152-158

  • Receive Date 18 May 2020
  • Accept Date 07 May 2022