| 姚丽波,田 古,钟 梅.中国医学科学院肿瘤医院基础科室绩效考评指标体系主观部分的评价[J].中国肿瘤,2014,23(5):368-372. |
| 中国医学科学院肿瘤医院基础科室绩效考评指标体系主观部分的评价 |
| Subjective Part Assessment of Performance Evaluation System in Research Departments in Cancer Institute and Hospital，Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences |
| 投稿时间：2013-12-27 |
| DOI：10.11735/j.issn.1004-0242.2014.05.A003 |
|
 |
| 中文关键词: 基础科室 绩效考评 指标体系 |
| 英文关键词:research department performance evaluation index system |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2373 |
| 全文下载次数: 1079 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 摘 要：［目的］ 完善基础科室绩效考评指标体系，同时探索综合评价方法。［方法］结合实际评审结果，运用克朗巴赫α指数、验证性因子分析评价指标体系的信度和效度。通过结构方程模型探索可能存在更为合理的模型，对指标体系的结构效度提出建议。运用多元线性回归分析中的标化回归系数探索各二级指标对专家评分的影响。［结果］ ①信度：一级指标及指标体系总体的克朗巴赫系数均大于0.7。②效度：标化因子载荷范围在0.58~0.80，均大于0.5，路径分析均具有统计学意义（T值均大于1.96）。指标体系条目水平的结构效度性能表现良好；模型整体拟合效果的主要指数基本达到标准，整体结构效度尚可。③对改善指标体系结构效度的探索：将评审结果随机分为两组，part1用探索性因子分析探索出模型1，part2用于验证模型1的结构效度，模型1条目水平和整体水平的结构效度均优于指标体系。④根据多元线性回归分析中的标化回归系数，影响较大的二级指标包括“本年度申请、中标课题及新开展各类项目情况”、“本年度人才培养、团队及导师梯队建设情况”等二级指标。［结论］ 指标体系的信度和效度良好，能较为科学、合理地反映医院各基础科室的年度科研工作绩效，但尚有不足。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Abstract：［Purpose］ To improve the performance evaluation system of research departments in Cancer Institute and Hospital，Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences，and to explore comprehensive assessment methods．［Methods］ The reliability of the index system was evaluated with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient，and the construct validity was evaluated with confirmatory factor analysis. To improve the system’s construct validity，Structural Equation Model was used to explore a better model. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to explore the effect of secondary index.［Results］ ①Reliability：Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of factor and total scores were all over 0.7．②Contract validity：the standard factor loading coefficients of the index system were over 0.5(range：0.58～0.80)，indicating path performed well．All factor loading coefficients were statistical significant(T-values all over 1.96)．Fit Index indicated that the system’s goodness of fit was accredited．③The evaluation results were divided into two parts randomly. Part 1 was used for exploratory factor analysis(EFA) to explore model1. Part 2 was taken as the sample to confirm model1. Compared with the primary system，model1 was better both in scale level and item level. ④The standardized estimate of multiple linear regression analysis indicated that the item “annual new programs” and “team construction” had a major impact on subjective assessment. ［Conclusion］ In spite of some deficiency， reliability and validity of the index system are acceptable. The index system can reflect the annual research job performance more scientific and reasonably in research departments in Cancer Institute and Hospital. |
|
在线阅读
查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
|
|