Validación transcultural del Cuestionario de Enseñanza Clínica de Maastricht
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evaluation of the clinical teacher's performance provides feedback to motivate them to improve their teaching skills. To perform the cross-cultural adaptation of the Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire, the International Guide for the Adaptation of the Questionnaires was followed. The validity of content, response process, construct and reliability were investigated. After cross-cultural adaption, residents of two University hospitals evaluated 187 clinical teachers. Content and answering process were validated. In the confirmatory factor analysis, all indexes and criteria for a good fit suited the 5 factors and 14 items model. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.80. The G coefficient was > 0.70, with low variance of the absolute error. Every clinical teacher should receive at least 6 evaluations to achieve a reliable evaluation of every domain and of their global performance. The Spanish version of the questionnaire is a valid, reliable instrument for medical residents to evaluate teachers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".