Comparison of indispensability and comprehensiveness results of the 1 st and 2 nd Delphi round (revised EPAs only).
The proportion of panellists who rated each of the 5 Likert scale points for ‘Indispensability’ (‘none’, ‘low’, ‘medium’, ‘high’, ‘very high’) for the four revised EPAs as well as ‘Comprehensiveness*’ (‘strongly disagree’, ‘disagree’,’ neither disagree nor agree’, ‘agree’, ‘strongly agree’) of the set as a whole in round 2 (-R2) are shown compared to their results of the 1 st round. The dotted red line shows the threshold value of 80%, all ratings to the left of this line should either be ‘high/agree’ (light green) or ‘very high/strongly agree’ (dark green) to indicate sufficient content valid... Mehr ...
Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Dokumenttyp: | Image |
Erscheinungsdatum: | 2021 |
Schlagwörter: | Biophysics / Biochemistry / Medicine / Developmental Biology / Science Policy / Infectious Diseases / Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified / PICU fellowship program directors / task force members / EPA / Delphi study Entrustable / round / PICU physicians / Dutch PICU fellows / content validity index / CVI / Dutch PICU physicians |
Sprache: | unknown |
Permalink: | https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-29018890 |
Datenquelle: | BASE; Originalkatalog |
Powered By: | BASE |
Link(s) : | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248565.g005 |
The proportion of panellists who rated each of the 5 Likert scale points for ‘Indispensability’ (‘none’, ‘low’, ‘medium’, ‘high’, ‘very high’) for the four revised EPAs as well as ‘Comprehensiveness*’ (‘strongly disagree’, ‘disagree’,’ neither disagree nor agree’, ‘agree’, ‘strongly agree’) of the set as a whole in round 2 (-R2) are shown compared to their results of the 1 st round. The dotted red line shows the threshold value of 80%, all ratings to the left of this line should either be ‘high/agree’ (light green) or ‘very high/strongly agree’ (dark green) to indicate sufficient content validity.