Other Titles
Selection and development of tools [Session]
Abstract
Session presented on Friday, April 8, 2016:
Intorduction: Clinical reasoning is the non-linear analytical process of making decisions for the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of problems facing a particular patient (Forsberg, Georg, Ziegert, & Fors, 2011; Shellenbarger & Robb, 2015). Nursing faculty often use virtual patients to assess their students' clinical reasoning abilities. Cook and Triola (2009) identified clinical reasoning as the only valid learning objective for a virtual patient simulation, yet they also found that most assessment instruments within virtual patient programs employed an algorithmic approach, scoring the completeness of information elicited, instead of the cognitive process of clinical reasoning. At the time of this study, there were still no valid and reliable instruments designed to evaluate clinical reasoning in a virtual patient program.
Methods: To measure the higher order thinking skill of clinical reasoning within a virtual patient program, the researchers first developed a conceptual framework of clinical reasoning within a virtual environment, then validated it with a group of subject matter experts in the field clinical reasoning. After the conceptual framework was validated, discrete components of the clinical reasoning framework were identified as areas for student assessment. Instruments were developed to measure these discrete components of clinical reasoning for BSN, RN-BSN, and MSN students in parallel, to control for differences in the learning populations.
Results: A conceptual framework for clinical reasoning within a virtual patient simulation was constructed and content validated with a group of experts in clinical reasoning. Assessment instruments were developed to measure three components of clinical reasoning within the framework: data collection, therapeutic communication, and information processing. Each instrument was examined for evidence of internal consistency reliability and validity for BSN, RN-BSN, and MSN populations. All items showed high quality, and the instruments showed evidence of reliability and validity for each population.
Conclusion: Attendees of this presentation will understand the development and validation process involved in identifying a new conceptual framework, as well as the methods used to develop valid and reliable assessment instruments to measure their conceptual framework.
Sigma Membership
Non-member
Lead Author Affiliation
Shadow Health, Inc., Gainesville, Florida, USA
Type
Presentation
Format Type
Text-based Document
Research Approach
N/A
Keywords:
Assessment, Instrument Development, Conceptual Framework
Recommended Citation
Jimenez, Francisco A. and Kleinheksel, A. J., "Methods for the development and validation of new assessment instruments" (2016). NERC (Nursing Education Research Conference). 35.
https://www.sigmarepository.org/nerc/2016/presentations_2016/35
Conference Name
Nursing Education Research Conference 2016
Conference Host
Sigma Theta Tau International,National League for Nursing
Conference Location
Washington, DC, USA
Conference Year
2016
Rights Holder
All rights reserved by the author(s) and/or publisher(s) listed in this item record unless relinquished in whole or part by a rights notation or a Creative Commons License present in this item record.
All permission requests should be directed accordingly and not to the Sigma Repository.
All submitting authors or publishers have affirmed that when using material in their work where they do not own copyright, they have obtained permission of the copyright holder prior to submission and the rights holder has been acknowledged as necessary.
Review Type
Abstract Review Only: Reviewed by Event Host
Acquisition
Proxy-submission
Methods for the development and validation of new assessment instruments
Washington, DC, USA
Session presented on Friday, April 8, 2016:
Intorduction: Clinical reasoning is the non-linear analytical process of making decisions for the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of problems facing a particular patient (Forsberg, Georg, Ziegert, & Fors, 2011; Shellenbarger & Robb, 2015). Nursing faculty often use virtual patients to assess their students' clinical reasoning abilities. Cook and Triola (2009) identified clinical reasoning as the only valid learning objective for a virtual patient simulation, yet they also found that most assessment instruments within virtual patient programs employed an algorithmic approach, scoring the completeness of information elicited, instead of the cognitive process of clinical reasoning. At the time of this study, there were still no valid and reliable instruments designed to evaluate clinical reasoning in a virtual patient program.
Methods: To measure the higher order thinking skill of clinical reasoning within a virtual patient program, the researchers first developed a conceptual framework of clinical reasoning within a virtual environment, then validated it with a group of subject matter experts in the field clinical reasoning. After the conceptual framework was validated, discrete components of the clinical reasoning framework were identified as areas for student assessment. Instruments were developed to measure these discrete components of clinical reasoning for BSN, RN-BSN, and MSN students in parallel, to control for differences in the learning populations.
Results: A conceptual framework for clinical reasoning within a virtual patient simulation was constructed and content validated with a group of experts in clinical reasoning. Assessment instruments were developed to measure three components of clinical reasoning within the framework: data collection, therapeutic communication, and information processing. Each instrument was examined for evidence of internal consistency reliability and validity for BSN, RN-BSN, and MSN populations. All items showed high quality, and the instruments showed evidence of reliability and validity for each population.
Conclusion: Attendees of this presentation will understand the development and validation process involved in identifying a new conceptual framework, as well as the methods used to develop valid and reliable assessment instruments to measure their conceptual framework.