ArticleBMC medical education2026
Development and validation of a dual-perspective competency scale for novice medical laboratory scientists in Japan.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCompetency-based education defines competencies as educational outcomes and guiding instruction and assessment. In Japan, standardised competency frameworks for medical laboratory scientists in clinical settings are underdeveloped. This study aimed to develop and validate a competency scale for novice medical laboratory scientists with less than 3 years of clinical experience into an assessment tool.
methodsThis study involved scale development and validation conducted in four phases: a preliminary study to test content validity for exploratory purposes, a pilot survey to examine the feasibility of the evaluation sheet under conditions similar to those of the main survey, a main survey to verify reliability and validity and a final phase to establish the completed scale. In the main survey, each novice medical and biomedical laboratory scientist (self-evaluator) was paired with two supervising evaluators from the same institution. The supervising evaluators, comprising educational supervisors, senior medical laboratory scientists or managers, were directly involved in the guidance and assessment of the corresponding novice.
resultsExploratory factor analysis of the self-evaluation dataset identified four factors with 51 items using a five-point Likert scale. The cumulative variance explained by the four factors was 52%, and Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.78 to 0.94 for each factor. The validity of the scale was confirmed through confirmatory factor analysis with the supervisory evaluation dataset.
conclusionsThe Japan Medical Laboratory Scientists Competency Scale demonstrated robust psychometric properties, establishing it as an effective tool for assessing novice medical laboratory scientists in Japan through self- and supervisory evaluation. Those findings would support enhancements in workforce development and competency-based education in this field.
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.