Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38116367›Full record

ArticleInnovation in aging2023

Recruiting a Person-Centered Direct Care Workforce Through Situational Judgement Tests: A Pilot Study in the Community Support of Older People in England.

Mark Wilberforce, Abby Dunn, Paul A Tiffin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Innovation in aging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mark WilberforceSchool of Business & Society, University of York, York, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6977-4483
Abby DunnFamily Fund, York, UK.
Paul A TiffinDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Studies have found that older people value care workers' character traits and interpersonal judgment even more highly than their technical skills. Yet identifying these traits at recruitment is challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the first situational judgement tests (STJs) for direct care workers. Research Design and Methods: Online tests were conducted with 251 care workers and members of the public in England. Participants evaluated the appropriateness of 61 potential behavioral responses to 11 "critical incidents," each depicting challenging care work scenarios. Data collection included a measure of personality traits. A subsample of 72 participants completed a second "test-retest" assessment. Results: A majority of test-takers (53%) found the test easy/very easy to complete, and most (55%) participants who worked in care reported the scenarios were highly realistic. Psychometric tests were positive. Test scores were unidimensional under a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (RMSEA = 0.038), and items broadly fit Rasch assumptions. Test-retest reliability (rho = 0.77) was acceptable, and for the general public sample, a modest increase in perceptions of the social standing of care work was observed. Test scores were positively correlated with 2 personality traits: agreeableness ( Discussion and Implications: The findings indicate support for the use of SJTs in direct care work. Its psychometric properties appear satisfactory, and collectively give confidence in the use of SJTs for assessing the suitability of candidates during recruitment. Further research should corroborate these findings in a new sample, and examine the relationship between test scores and job performance.

Indexed as

Long-term careRecruitmentSituational judgement testsValues-based recruitmentWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID38116367
PMCPMC10729733

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.