中华医学教育探索杂志
中華醫學教育探索雜誌
중화의학교육탐색잡지
Chinese Journal of Medical Education Research
2014年
6期
553-558
,共6页
临床学科%博士质量%科学学位%专业学位%评价体系
臨床學科%博士質量%科學學位%專業學位%評價體繫
림상학과%박사질량%과학학위%전업학위%평개체계
Clinical science%Quality of doctor%Science degree%Professional degree%Evaluation system
目的：通过对某军医大学一定毕业年限的临床学科博士进行评价调查，掌握其综合表现及职业发展状况，探寻和分析教育培养中的问题和不足，为深化改革提供参考。方法分层随机抽取9所军队医院，运用临床学科博士质量追踪评价指标体系及调查问卷，采取自评与他评相结合的方法进行评价调查。质量评价体系涉及军政素质、临床水平、教研水平、发展潜力4个一级指标，以及15个二级指标。自评和他评得分比较选用Pearson秩相关分析，不同学位类型博士得分比较选用方差分析，承担课题情况及论文发表情况比较选用χ2检验。结果毕业博士综合表现优良，自评得分（92.72±7.06），他评得分（93.61±8.05），相关系数0.33（P=0.040）；科学学位博士和专业学位博士相比，在承担科研课题（χ2=6.08，P=0.000）、发表论文（χ2=5.97，P=0.010）方面差异有统计学意义，在完成临床工作上则相对欠缺；受评群体在承担科研项目、发表高水平论文方面均显不足；不同学位类型博士对于提升质量要素认知不同。结论深化临床学科博士教育改革应以临床能力和创新能力为核心，聚焦创新能力、重视专业学位博士教育、探索多元参与评价机制，达到促进教育质量全面提升的目的。
目的：通過對某軍醫大學一定畢業年限的臨床學科博士進行評價調查，掌握其綜閤錶現及職業髮展狀況，探尋和分析教育培養中的問題和不足，為深化改革提供參攷。方法分層隨機抽取9所軍隊醫院，運用臨床學科博士質量追蹤評價指標體繫及調查問捲，採取自評與他評相結閤的方法進行評價調查。質量評價體繫涉及軍政素質、臨床水平、教研水平、髮展潛力4箇一級指標，以及15箇二級指標。自評和他評得分比較選用Pearson秩相關分析，不同學位類型博士得分比較選用方差分析，承擔課題情況及論文髮錶情況比較選用χ2檢驗。結果畢業博士綜閤錶現優良，自評得分（92.72±7.06），他評得分（93.61±8.05），相關繫數0.33（P=0.040）；科學學位博士和專業學位博士相比，在承擔科研課題（χ2=6.08，P=0.000）、髮錶論文（χ2=5.97，P=0.010）方麵差異有統計學意義，在完成臨床工作上則相對欠缺；受評群體在承擔科研項目、髮錶高水平論文方麵均顯不足；不同學位類型博士對于提升質量要素認知不同。結論深化臨床學科博士教育改革應以臨床能力和創新能力為覈心，聚焦創新能力、重視專業學位博士教育、探索多元參與評價機製，達到促進教育質量全麵提升的目的。
목적：통과대모군의대학일정필업년한적림상학과박사진행평개조사，장악기종합표현급직업발전상황，탐심화분석교육배양중적문제화불족，위심화개혁제공삼고。방법분층수궤추취9소군대의원，운용림상학과박사질량추종평개지표체계급조사문권，채취자평여타평상결합적방법진행평개조사。질량평개체계섭급군정소질、림상수평、교연수평、발전잠력4개일급지표，이급15개이급지표。자평화타평득분비교선용Pearson질상관분석，불동학위류형박사득분비교선용방차분석，승담과제정황급논문발표정황비교선용χ2검험。결과필업박사종합표현우량，자평득분（92.72±7.06），타평득분（93.61±8.05），상관계수0.33（P=0.040）；과학학위박사화전업학위박사상비，재승담과연과제（χ2=6.08，P=0.000）、발표논문（χ2=5.97，P=0.010）방면차이유통계학의의，재완성림상공작상칙상대흠결；수평군체재승담과연항목、발표고수평논문방면균현불족；불동학위류형박사대우제승질량요소인지불동。결론심화림상학과박사교육개혁응이림상능력화창신능력위핵심，취초창신능력、중시전업학위박사교육、탐색다원삼여평개궤제，체도촉진교육질량전면제승적목적。
Objective To evaluate the level situation of clinical doctors graduating from mil-itary medical university within a certain period, understand their career development, and explore and analyze the problems and deficiencies in doctoral education and training to provide reference for deep-ening the reform of clinical disciplines doctoral education. Methods Stratified random samples of 9 Hospitals were selected and the established evaluation index system of clinical discipline quality tracking and investigation questionnaire was used to evaluate doctoral quality. Evaluation was surveyed by self rating and other rating combination. Quality evaluation system contains 4 first level indicators such as the military and political quality, clinical, teaching and research level, the development po-tential as well as 15 second-level indexes. The scores of self-assessment and other evaluation were compared by Pearson rank correlation analysis. The corresponding indicator scores of different doctorate types were compared using the test of variance and the subject research and published papers were analyzed by χ2 inspection. Results The comprehensive score of graduated doctors is excellent, with self-evaluation score (92.72±7.06) and other evaluation score (93.61±8.05). Correlation coefficient is 0.33(P=0.04); The academic doctors have done better in publishing papers(χ2=5.97, P=0.01) and undertaking subject research(χ2=6.08, P=0.00), but poorer in clinical work compared with the doctors of professional degree. The assessed groups are inadequate in publishing high level papers and in un-dertaking research projects and doctors of different degree types have different cognition of the ele-ments of improving the quality. Conclusions Cultivating the doctors' clinical ability and innovation ability are the cores of deepening the reform of clinical doctoral education. We should focus on inno-vation ability , value the cultivation of the clinical professional doctoral degree and explore various joint evaluation systems to attain the goal of enhancing the education quality of doctors.
