Modified Delphi study identifies evaluation indicators for teaching ability in general practice faculty, suggesting improvements for faculty quality.
Abstract Background Teaching ability plays a significant role in evaluating the quality of general practice faculty. The clinical faculty is primarily comprised of specialists from general hospitals in China, and there is a shortage of high-quality general practice faculty. Currently, there are no effective assessment tools for evaluating the teaching ability of general practice faculty in tertiary hospitals, particularly in various clinical teaching scenarios. Therefore, the aim of this study was to establish a scenario-based evaluation index system for teaching ability of general practice faculty in tertiary hospitals. Methods This study was carried out from February to May 2025 in Beijing, China. Two rounds of email-based Delphi survey were carried out to identify teaching ability evaluation indicators. Consensus was established based on the definitive criteria: a median score exceeding seven on a 9-point scale and at least 70% of panel ratings falling within the top tertile (7–9) for both importance and feasibility. Results A total of 5 primary indicators, 14 secondary indicators and 46 tertiary indicators achieved consensus after two rounds of Delphi survey. The final set of indicators included 5 primary indicators: Department orientation (2 secondary indicators and 6 tertiary indicators), General Practice clinical thinking (2 secondary indicators and 9 tertiary indicators), Doctor-Patient communication (3 secondary indicators and 9 tertiary indicators), Medical record writing (2 secondary indicators and 6 tertiary indicators), Teaching activities (5 secondary indicators and 16 tertiary indicators). Conclusion The evaluation framework established in this study is situated within the teaching scenarios and aims to assess the teaching ablities of general practice faculty in tertiary hospitals. This will contribute to improving the quality of general practice faculty development and enhancing the professional competence of general practitioners in primary care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: