ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Establishment and validation of an evaluation system for hospital infection prevention and control courses: a study protocol using the Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: The evaluation of hospital infection prevention and control (HIPC) courses holds significant importance in guaranteeing the quality. Regrettably, there is currently no specific evaluation tool available in China for this purpose. This study aims to develop a comprehensive system to evaluate the HIPC courses in China. Methods: The authors developed an initial draft for a curriculum evaluation system, based on the context, input, process, and product model, a literature review, and semi-structured interviews with 23 participants. Subsequently, an evaluation system was established via two rounds of Delphi surveys involving 18 experts from 7 A-grade tertiary hospitals and 11 higher medical education institutions across China. The validity of the evaluation system was further confirmed using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), ensuring a comprehensive assessment of the established framework. Results: After two rounds of correspondence, the evaluation index system includes four first-level indicators, 13 second-level indicators, and 52 third-level indicators. The expert authority coefficients for these rounds were 0.869 and 0.887, respectively, indicating a high level of expertise among the participating experts. Additionally, the Kendall's W of each index are, respectively, was 0.153 ~ 0.162 and 0.168 ~ 0.175 ( Conclusion: The evaluation system for the hospital infection prevention and control courses is CIPP-oriented, comprehensive, and reliable. It offers a practical framework for comprehensively assessing the teaching effectiveness of the courses and enhancing educational quality.
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.