ArticleHuman resources for health2025
Development and validation of a competency-based assessment tool for public health workers in Shanghai community health centers: a population-based study.
Article in Human resources for health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe competence of public health workers is crucial for grassroots public health service capabilities. This study aimed to establish a competency model for public health workers and to test the reliability and validity of the model.
methodsAn evaluation indicators scale of competency of public health workers in Shanghai community health service centers (CHSCs) was constructed through a literature review, expert consultation, behavioral event interviews and questionnaire surveys. A questionnaire survey was carried out with 3809 public health workers from 249 Shanghai CHSCs to test the reliability and validity of the constructed scale.
resultsExploratory factor analysis identified 5 common factors: comprehensive ability, professional spirit, professional knowledge, professional skills, research and development ability. The cumulative variance contribution rate was 62.241%. The factor load for each item ranged from 0.495 to 0.868. The overall Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the questionnaire was 0.985, for the five dimensions ranged from 0.916 to 0.969. The overall split-half reliability of the questionnaire was 0.842, and that of the five dimensions ranged from 0.913 to 0.952, with the Guttman split-half reliability coefficient ranging from 0.912 to 0.949. The correlation coefficients for all scale items with the total score ranged from 0.591 to 0.854 (p < 0.01). The correlation coefficients between each item and each dimension ranged from 0.434 to 0.925. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the model had a good fitting effect (χ
conclusionsThe constructed scale of competency of public health workers in Shanghai CHSCs has good reliability and validity and can be used as a tool to evaluate the competency level of public health workers.
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.