ArticleTzu chi medical journal
Reliability and validity of the Taiwanese version of the collaborative practice assessment tool: A pilot study.
Article in Tzu chi medical journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric Properties of the Traditional Chinese Version of the Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Attainment Survey.Research in nursing & health · 2026Article
- Article
- An evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Australian Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To promote teamwork communication and collaboration between health-care professionals, educators emphasized proper training programs to develop interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP) among postgraduate (PG) trainees. A literature review indicated that the faculty necessarily measured the competency in IPCP with structured and applicable assessment tools in collocation to training programs domestically. A cross-sectional psychometric study was conducted to construct a reliable assessment tool for measuring PG learning outcome in Taiwan through a bidirectional translation. The study aimed to assess the interprofessional team behavior of trainees using the Taiwanese version of the collaborative practice assessment tool (T-CPAT). Materials and Methods: The study recruited 43 participants to undergo a PG training program in a single institute and to complete T-CPAT. Data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 software. We employed descriptive analysis of demographic variables. The validity of T-CPAT was analyzed by experts in different specialties and its availability was assessed by item-level analysis. Furthermore, the T-CPAT reliability was tested using Cronbach's α. Results: The average score was 305.2 (standard deviation = 38.08), and the expert validity of the T-CPAT was 0.96. In the item-level analysis, there were no failure items in T-CAPT. Cronbach's α reached 0.94 (95% confidence interval = 0.90-0.96). Conclusion: The study demonstrated good reliability and validity for the T-CPAT. Thus, the T-CPAT can be used to accurately measure and assess the competence of IPCP in PG trainees in general medicine in Taiwan. The results were deemed sufficient to provide faculties with related arrangements for future teaching plans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.