PubMed · 16189408
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Deb A Huber. Advancing endoscopes.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001610-200507000-00007
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: Recent European policies emphasise that the training and education of health professionals are a major means of improving mental health services. Little comparative research has been undertaken to ascertain the degree of homogeneity in the training of nurses working in mental health settings across Europe. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the training of nurses working in mental health settings in a range of European countries. Specifically, information regarding criteria for entry into training, type of qualification awarded and further training opportunities was to be explored. METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS: A specially designed questionnaire was designed to gather data from senior mental health nurses working in the mental health field in a sample of 12 countries from across Europe. RESULTS: Findings disclosed considerable disparity between countries in respect to nurse training, with few countries requiring a specialist nursing qualification to practice in the mental health field. There appears to be little homogeneity in terms of educational provision pre and post-qualification. CONCLUSIONS: More research is needed into how European states deliver nurse training and education, how students are prepared for various practice settings and the effect on outcomes for service users of different models of training.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: To establish credible, defensible and acceptable passing scores for written tests is a challenge for health profession educators. Angoff procedures are often used to establish pass/fail decisions for written and performance tests. In an Angoff procedure judges' expertise and professional skills are assumed to influence their ratings of the items during standard-setting. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of judges' item-related knowledge on their judgement of the difficulty of items, and second, to determine the stability of differences between judges. METHOD: Thirteen judges were presented with two sets of 60 items on different occasions. They were asked to not only judge the difficulty of the items but also to answer them, without the benefit of the answer key. For each of the 120 items an Angoff estimate and an item score were obtained. The relationship between the Angoff estimate and the item score was examined by applying a regression analysis to the 60 items (Angoff estimate, score) for each judge at each occasion. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that in standard-setting the individual judgement of the individual item is not only a reflection of the difficulty of the item but also of the inherent stringency of the judge and his/her subject-related knowledge. Considerable variation between judges in their stringency was found, and Angoff estimates were significantly affected by a judge knowing or not knowing the answer to the item. These findings stress the importance of a careful selection process of the Angoff judges when making pass/fail decisions in health professions education. They imply that judges should be selected who are not only capable of conceptualising the 'minimally competent student', but who would also be capable of answering all the items.