Supplementary Files
Keywords
Faculty development
Educational assessment
Cross-cultural adaptation
Simulation educators
How to Cite
Copyright © | All rights reserved.
The journal holds the exclusive copyright for the publication of this article under the terms of Brazilian law 9610/98.
Partial reproduction
The use of parts of the texts, figures and questionnaire of the article is free, being mandatory the citation of the authors and journal.
Total reproduction
It is expressly prohibited and must be authorized by the journal.
Abstract
Objective: To translate and cross-culturally adapt the Simulation Educator Needs Assessment Tool (SENAT) into Brazilian Portuguese and present initial evidence of its application and internal consistency. Methods: Methodological study of translation and cross-cultural adaptation. The process followed international recommendations, including translation, synthesis, back translation, expert committee review, and pretesting with simulation educators. The Brazilian Portuguese version was administered to healthcare simulation educators. Descriptive analyses and a preliminary assessment of internal consistency were performed using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients. Results: Sixty-one simulation educators participated in the study. The Brazilian Portuguese version of the SENAT comprised two dimensions: Statements and Methods. Mean scores were higher for the Statements dimension than for the Methods dimension, with a predominance of agreement responses across most items. Internal consistency was satisfactory, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.92 and McDonald's omega of 0.94 for the Statements dimension, and a Cronbach's alpha of 0.83 and McDonald's omega of 0.85 for the Methods dimension. Conclusion: The Brazilian Portuguese version of the SENAT demonstrated initial cultural adequacy and satisfactory preliminary evidence of internal consistency, indicating its potential to support the identification of simulation educators' professional development needs and faculty development programs.
References
BEATON DE, et al. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 2000; 25(24): 3186-3191.
CHENG A, et al. Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Education, 2014; 48(7): 657-666.
CHENG A, et al. Faculty development for simulation programs: five issues for the future of debriefing training. Simulation in Healthcare, 2015; 10(4): 217-222.
COOK DA, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, 2011; 306(9): 978-988.
EPSTEIN J, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Health Education Impact Questionnaire: experimental study showed expert committee, not back-translation, added value. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2015; 68(4): 360-369.
GABA DM. The future vision of simulation in health care. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 2004; 13(Suppl 1): i2-i10.
HALLMARK BF. Faculty development in simulation education. Nursing Clinics of North America, 2015; 50(2): 389-397.
INACSL STANDARDS COMMITTEE. Healthcare Simulation Standards of Best Practice®. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 2021; 58: 1-92.
JEFFRIES PR. A framework for designing, implementing, and evaluating simulations used as teaching strategies in nursing. Nursing Education Perspectives, 2005; 26(2): 96-103.
LEIGHTON K, et al. Development of the Simulation Educator Needs Assessment Tool (SENAT). Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 2023; 76: 65-74.
McDONALD RP. Test theory: a unified treatment. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah-NJ, 1999.
McGAGHIE WC, et al. Does simulation-based medical education with deliberate practice yield better results than traditional clinical education? A meta-analytic comparative review. Academic Medicine, 2011; 86(6): 706-711.
MOTOLA I, et al. Simulation in healthcare education: a best evidence practical guide. AMEE Guide No. 82. Medical Teacher, 2013; 35(10): e1511-e1530.
OVERMANN KM, et al. The role of the simulation educator in healthcare simulation. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 2020; 44: 1-9.
LOPREIATO JO, et al. Healthcare Simulation Dictionary. 2nd ed. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: Rockville-MD, 2020.
MESSICK S. Validity. In: LINN RL (ed.). Educational Measurement. 3rd ed. American Council on Education and Macmillan: New York-NY, 1989; p13-103.
SOUSA VD, ROJJANASRIRAT W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 2011; 17(2): 268-274.
STEINERT Y, et al. A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to enhance teaching effectiveness: a 10-year update. Medical Teacher, 2016; 38(8): 769-786.
TAVAKOL M, DENNICK R. Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2011; 2: 53-55.
WILD D, et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value in Health, 2005; 8(2): 94-104.