EVALUATING THE PSYCHOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A WRITTEN ASSESSMENT DESIGNED TO MEASURE KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICES RELATED TO SAFE DENTAL CARE.

Authors

  • Mashael Alhumidi Hamed Alharbi, Tagreed Fahd AlDosry, Khalid Abdulaziz Alrafie, Alanoud bassam albalawi, Sara Nasser Altamimi Abdullah Obaid Alamri, Wessam abdullah Alforaih, Mohammed Abdullah Alqahtani, Meshal Fawaz Alshammari, Ibtihaj Abdulaziz Almutairi Author

Abstract

Ensuring patient safety is a critical aspect of dental practice, requiring continuous evaluation and training of dental professionals. Written tests are widely used to assess knowledge and understanding of patient safety principles, but their effectiveness depends on robust psychometric properties, including validity, reliability, item quality, and fairness. This article explores the process of determining the psychometric properties of a written test designed to assess safe dental practices. Key patient safety domains, such as prescribing practices, infection control, and management of procedural complications, are discussed as foundational components of the test. Principles of psychometric evaluation, including content and construct validity, internal consistency, item difficulty, discrimination indices, and fairness, are outlined. The article details the development, piloting, and refinement of the test, emphasizing the importance of expert review and statistical analysis in validating the tool. By rigorously evaluating and refining written assessments, dental educators can enhance the measurement of safety knowledge, identify training needs, and contribute to fostering a culture of patient safety in dentistry. This work highlights the implications of psychometrically sound tests for improving dental education and ensuring safer practices in clinical settings.

Downloads

Published

2024-12-09

How to Cite

EVALUATING THE PSYCHOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A WRITTEN ASSESSMENT DESIGNED TO MEASURE KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICES RELATED TO SAFE DENTAL CARE. (2024). International Development Planning Review, 23(2), 1245-1249. https://idpr.org.uk/index.php/idpr/article/view/453