File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Establishing the content validity in Hong Kong of the prioritised criteria of consultation competence in the Leicester Assessment Package (LAP)

TitleEstablishing the content validity in Hong Kong of the prioritised criteria of consultation competence in the Leicester Assessment Package (LAP)
Authors
KeywordsCriteria of consultation competence
Hong Kong
Leicester Assessment Package
Validation
Issue Date2003
PublisherHong Kong College of Family Physicians. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.hkcfp.org.hk/
Citation
Hong Kong Practitioner, 2003, v. 25 n. 12, p. 596-602 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective: To test the content validity in Hong Kong of the prioritised criteria of consultation competence in the Leicester Assessment Package (LAP). Design: A detailed questionnaire was sent to doctors with experience of family medicine in Hong Kong to seek their views on the seven prioritised consultation categories and 39 component competences in the LAP on a six-point scale (strongly approve to strongly disapprove). Respondents also had the opportunity to reject or suggest alternative categories, components and/or weightings. Background demographic and professional data were collected. Subjects: 489 full members of the HKCFP with current Hong Kong postal address. Main outcome measure: The respondents' collated levels of approval of the LAP consultation categories, component competences and weightings and any consensus for changes. Results: There was a response rate of 57%. Of the respondents 92%, and 82% to 97% either strongly approved or approved of the overall LAP set of consultation categories and the individual categories respectively. Thirty-seven of the 39 suggested component competences were supported by more than 80% of respondents. There was little support for excluding, including or shifting any categories or component competences. Ninety-three percent of respondents were in favour of the need to identify priorities between any categories of consultation competence and 88% of respondents expressed approval of the suggested weightings. Conclusion: The high levels of approval from respondents suggest that the content validity of the categories and components of consultation competence in the LAP has been established in Hong Kong and that the LAP weightings of consultation categories have also been validated. Indeed, the results closely correlate with the findings of the original study in the United Kingdom. The LAP criteria of consultation competence may be used with confidence as measures against which consultation performance can be judged in formative or regulatory assessment (and improvement) of consultation competence in family medicine in Hong Kong.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/45142
ISSN
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.101
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLau, JKCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorFraser, RCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLam, CLKen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2007-10-30T06:18:15Z-
dc.date.available2007-10-30T06:18:15Z-
dc.date.issued2003en_HK
dc.identifier.citationHong Kong Practitioner, 2003, v. 25 n. 12, p. 596-602en_HK
dc.identifier.issn1027-3948en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/45142-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To test the content validity in Hong Kong of the prioritised criteria of consultation competence in the Leicester Assessment Package (LAP). Design: A detailed questionnaire was sent to doctors with experience of family medicine in Hong Kong to seek their views on the seven prioritised consultation categories and 39 component competences in the LAP on a six-point scale (strongly approve to strongly disapprove). Respondents also had the opportunity to reject or suggest alternative categories, components and/or weightings. Background demographic and professional data were collected. Subjects: 489 full members of the HKCFP with current Hong Kong postal address. Main outcome measure: The respondents' collated levels of approval of the LAP consultation categories, component competences and weightings and any consensus for changes. Results: There was a response rate of 57%. Of the respondents 92%, and 82% to 97% either strongly approved or approved of the overall LAP set of consultation categories and the individual categories respectively. Thirty-seven of the 39 suggested component competences were supported by more than 80% of respondents. There was little support for excluding, including or shifting any categories or component competences. Ninety-three percent of respondents were in favour of the need to identify priorities between any categories of consultation competence and 88% of respondents expressed approval of the suggested weightings. Conclusion: The high levels of approval from respondents suggest that the content validity of the categories and components of consultation competence in the LAP has been established in Hong Kong and that the LAP weightings of consultation categories have also been validated. Indeed, the results closely correlate with the findings of the original study in the United Kingdom. The LAP criteria of consultation competence may be used with confidence as measures against which consultation performance can be judged in formative or regulatory assessment (and improvement) of consultation competence in family medicine in Hong Kong.en_HK
dc.format.extent478337 bytes-
dc.format.extent6261 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain-
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherHong Kong College of Family Physicians. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.hkcfp.org.hk/en_HK
dc.relation.ispartofHong Kong Practitioneren_HK
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.subjectCriteria of consultation competenceen_HK
dc.subjectHong Kongen_HK
dc.subjectLeicester Assessment Packageen_HK
dc.subjectValidationen_HK
dc.titleEstablishing the content validity in Hong Kong of the prioritised criteria of consultation competence in the Leicester Assessment Package (LAP)en_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=1027-3948&volume=25&issue=12&spage=596&epage=602&date=2003&atitle=Establishing+the+content+validity+in+Hong+Kong+of+the+prioritised+criteria+of+consultation+competence+in+the+Leicester+Assessment+Package+(LAP)en_HK
dc.identifier.emailLam, CLK:clklam@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLam, CLK=rp00350en_HK
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_versionen_HK
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-1342291099en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros86236-
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-1342291099&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume25en_HK
dc.identifier.issue12en_HK
dc.identifier.spage596en_HK
dc.identifier.epage602en_HK
dc.publisher.placeHong Kongen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLau, JKC=7402446082en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridFraser, RC=13007931600en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLam, CLK=24755913900en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats