You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Psychometric properties of the newly developed Physician Teaching Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PTSQ)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Education, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12909-016-0764-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christoph Dybowski, Levente Kriston, Sigrid Harendza |
| Abstract |
High teaching quality and students' corresponding learning progress are the most important indicators of teachers' work performance. Theory and numerous empirical studies indicate that self-efficacy, a person's belief in her or his ability to accomplish a task, is an important predictor of work performance. Accordingly, it can be assumed that teaching self-efficacy also influences teaching performance and students' learning progress with regard to physicians who teach in undergraduate medical education. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop and validate an instrument measuring clinical teaching self-efficacy in physicians. We developed 16 items reflecting physicians' beliefs to provide high quality clinical teaching when facing regularly occurring critical teaching situations. These constitute the Physician Teaching Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PTSQ). For its validation, we used data from a sample of 247 physicians from internal medicine and surgery at six German medical faculties. Regarding factorial validity, we performed exploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM) as well as confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Regarding criterion validity, correlations with the scales of the Physician Teaching Motivation Questionnaire (PTMQ), teaching experience and perceived teaching involvement were calculated. Additionally, we conducted the same analyses with a short 6-item version. ESEM delivered evidence for a three-factor structure with a superordinate general factor, which was confirmed by local and global fit indicators in CFA (RMSEA = .055, TLI = .939, SRMR = .048, CFI = .948). We identified the following three subfactors: teaching self-efficacy with respect to self-regulation, dyadic regulation involving students, and triadic regulation involving students and patients. Internal consistencies indicated acceptable to excellent reliability for all scales (Cronbach's alpha = .77-.90). Theory-consistent correlations with the PTMQ scales, teaching experience, and teaching involvement confirmed criterion validity. Besides excellent global fit, the short version of the PTSQ also fulfilled all other validity criteria. The PTSQ is a valid instrument to assess physicians' clinical teaching self-efficacy. It could be used in faculty development programmes and for educational research. The short version could be used in situations that are time-critical for physicians in order to ensure high response rates. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 22% |
| Unknown | 21 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 29% |
| Psychology | 8 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 15% |
| Unknown | 21 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 October 2016.
All research outputs
#15,384,989
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,265
of 3,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,956
of 321,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#45
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,338 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,009 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.