Jove
Visualize
联系我们
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
关于 JoVE
概览领导团队博客JoVE 帮助中心
作者
出版流程编辑委员会范围与政策同行评审常见问题投稿
图书馆员
用户评价订阅访问资源图书馆顾问委员会常见问题
研究
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments存档
教育
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab Manual教师资源中心教师网站
使用条款与条件
隐私政策
政策

相关概念视频

Methods of Documentation V: CBE01:23

Methods of Documentation V: CBE

894
Charting by Exception, or CBE, is a method of documentation used in healthcare, particularly in nursing, that focuses on documenting only significant or abnormal findings rather than recording every detail. This approach aims to streamline the documentation process, improve efficiency, and ensure that healthcare providers can quickly identify deviations from normalcy in patient assessments.
In CBE, healthcare professionals establish predefined standards of practice that define what constitutes...
894
Nursing Evaluation01:15

Nursing Evaluation

3.3K
The evaluation stage signals the end of the nursing process. The nurse gathers evaluative data to assess whether or not the patient has attained the expected results. Whereas the nurse collects data in the nursing assessment to identify the patient's health concerns, the evaluation stage data determines if the indicated health issues are resolved. Evaluative data collection includes two sections: the data acquired to evaluate patient outcomes and the time criteria for data collection.
3.3K
Data Collection III01:05

Data Collection III

2.7K
The physical assessment examines the patient for objective data that defines the patient's condition, and aids in formulating the nursing care plan. The purpose of physical assessment is a health status appraisal, which includes identifying health problems, and establishing a database for nursing intervention.
The principles to begin the physical assessment include conducting a comprehensive or problem-related history in a quiet, well-lit room, emphasizing privacy and comfort for the...
2.7K
Methods of Documentation III: PIE01:21

Methods of Documentation III: PIE

1.4K
Problem-intervention-evaluation (PIE) is a systematic approach to documentation used in healthcare settings for clinical decision-making and patient care planning. It is a structured approach to organizing patient data based on problems, interventions, and evaluations. Here's a breakdown of its key features and considerations:
1.4K
Reliability and Validity01:29

Reliability and Validity

12.7K
Reliability and validity are two important considerations that must be made with any type of data collection. Reliability refers to the ability to consistently produce a given result. In the context of psychological research, this would mean that any instruments or tools used to collect data do so in consistent, reproducible ways.
12.7K
Critical Thinking II01:25

Critical Thinking II

2.8K
Critical thinking is a cognitive process with several attributes. The attributes of critical thinking include the following:
2.8K

您也可能阅读

相关文章

通过共同作者、期刊和引用图与本文相关的文章。

排序
Same author

Coaching Efficiency in Residency: From "Go Faster" to FOCUS.

Journal of graduate medical education·2026
Same author

Leadership Education in Physical Therapy: A Roadmap to Prioritize Interventions.

Journal, physical therapy education·2025
Same author

Assessing Geriatric Competencies in Residents: Validating the 5Ms Dimensions.

Journal of graduate medical education·2025
Same author

Involving Patients Throughout Sensitive Simulation.

The clinical teacher·2025
Same author

Conditional Probability of Observing a Poor Night According to Sleep Depth Among Individuals With Insomnia.

Journal of sleep research·2025
Same author

Print-It-Yourself Bone Marrow Biopsy Simulator Compared With Human Cadavers.

Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare·2025

相关实验视频

Updated: Jun 23, 2025

Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies
10:38

Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies

Published on: January 16, 2019

20.2K

基于信任的目标结构化临床检查中的反:内容分析和评分方法的分析.

Isabelle Nguyen-Tri1, Dave Tremblay-Laroche1, Félix Lavigne2

  • 1is Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.

Journal of graduate medical education
|June 17, 2024
PubMed
概括

在基于委托的客观结构化临床检查 (OSCE) 中,检查人员提供了高质量的,一致的反. 评分方法没有显著影响反质量或与学习目标的协调.

更多相关视频

A Cross-Disciplinary and Multi-Modal Experimental Design for Studying Near-Real-Time Authentic Examination Experiences
00:08

A Cross-Disciplinary and Multi-Modal Experimental Design for Studying Near-Real-Time Authentic Examination Experiences

Published on: September 4, 2019

7.0K
SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients
11:05

SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients

Published on: February 6, 2021

14.6K

相关实验视频

Last Updated: Jun 23, 2025

Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies
10:38

Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies

Published on: January 16, 2019

20.2K
A Cross-Disciplinary and Multi-Modal Experimental Design for Studying Near-Real-Time Authentic Examination Experiences
00:08

A Cross-Disciplinary and Multi-Modal Experimental Design for Studying Near-Real-Time Authentic Examination Experiences

Published on: September 4, 2019

7.0K
SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients
11:05

SECONDs Administration Guidelines: A Fast Tool to Assess Consciousness in Brain-injured Patients

Published on: February 6, 2021

14.6K

科学领域:

  • 医学教育 医学教育
  • 临床评估 临床评估
  • 医疗保健专业发展

背景情况:

  • 将可信任的专业活动 (EPA) 整合到客观结构化临床检查 (OSCE) 中,为居民提供及时的反.
  • 对这些评估中反质量的担忧仍然存在.
  • 本研究探讨了在基于委托的欧安组织背景下评估反效率的需要.

研究的目的:

  • 在以委托为基础的OSCE期间,评估审查员口头反的质量和内容一致性.
  • 为了比较不同评分方法对反质量和与学习目标对齐的影响.

主要方法:

  • 欧安组织对内部医学医生的进展测试评估了7个EPA.
  • 考官反 (2分钟时间) 被记录并使用学习质量评估 (QuAL) 评分进行分析.
  • 评估了反与EPA学习目标 (能力里程碑,特定任务能力) 的一致性.
  • 一个随机交叉实验比较了3分可信度度表与特定任务的评分检查清单.

主要成果:

  • 21名检查员向67名居民提供了反.
  • 反质量很高 (平均QuAL得分为4.3/5) 并与EPA的学习目标保持一致.
  • 考生平均解决了2.5个里程碑 (61%) 和1.2个特定任务能力 (46%).
  • 评分方法对QuAL分数或与里程碑/能力的对齐没有显著影响 (P > .13).

结论:

  • 考试人员提供了有价值的,高质量的反,与基于信任的欧安组织的学习成果保持一致.
  • 反质量和调整被探索为不同的维度.
  • 评估的评分方法没有显著影响反质量或与学习目标的协调.