期刊文献+

德尔菲法在住宿场所卫生量化分级管理评分表指标体系改进中的应用 被引量:22

The application of Delphi method in improving the score table for the hygienic quantifying and classification of hotels
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的用德尔菲(Delphi)法征求全国专家意见,改进住宿场所卫生量化分级管理指标体系,使之适应全国应用的需要。方法对来自全国18个省(市)、自治区的78位专家进行两轮Delphi专家咨询,根据指标重要性得分的均值大小筛选指标并确定其权重。结果专家从事卫生防疫工作的平均年限为(21.08±5.78)年,平均权威系数C,为0.89±0.07。两轮咨询的专家应答率分别为98.72%(77/78)和100.00%(77/77),平均反馈时间分别为(8.49±4.48)d、(5.86±2.28)d,差异具有统计学意义(t=4.60,P〈0.01)。两轮咨询Kendall协调系数分别为0.26(χ^2=723.63,P〈0.01),0.32(χ^2=635.65,P〈0.01),经卡方检验均具有统计学意义,说明专家意见逐渐趋于一致。住宿场所卫生量化分级管理评分表共包括3项一级指标(卫生管理、卫生设施设备、卫生操作要求)和36项二级指标,3项一级指标的权重系数分别为0.35、0.34、0.31。结论Delphi法可用于大范围专家意见咨询,解决住宿场所卫生量化分级评分表指标体系改进的问题。 Objective By means of Delphi method and expert panel consultations, to choose suitable indicators and improve the score table for classifying the hygienic condition of hotels so that it can be widely used at nationwide. Methods A two-round Delphi consultation was held to choose suitable indicators among 78 experts from 18 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions. The suitable indicators were selected according to the importance recognized by experts. Results The average length of service in public health of the experts was (21.08± 5.78 )years and the average coefficient of experts' authorities C, was 0. 89± 0.07. The response rates of the two-round consultation were 98.72% ( 77/78 ) and 100. 00% ( 77/ 77 ). The average feedback time were ( 8.49± 4. 48 ) d, ( 5.86±2. 28 ) d, and the difference between two rounds was statistically significant ( t = 4. 60, P 〈 0. 01 ). Kendall' s coefficient were 0. 26 ( χ^2= 723.63, P 〈 0. 01 ) ,0. 32( χ^2= 635.65 ,P 〈0. 01 )and opinions among experts became consistent. The score table for the hygienic quantifying and classification of hotels was composed of three first-class indicators (hygienic management, hygienic facilities and hygienic practices ) and 36 second-class indicators. The weight coefficients of the three first-class indicators were 0. 35,0. 34,0. 31. Conclusion Delphi method might be used in a large-scale consultation among experts and be propitious to improve the score table for the hygienic quantifying and classification.
出处 《中华预防医学杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2009年第4期287-292,共6页 Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine
关键词 德尔菲技术 公共卫生管理 评价研究 Delphi technique Public health administration Evaluation studies
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献22

  • 1崔志红,王勇.旅店业卫生监督管理工作存在的问题与对策[J].中国医药导报,2006,3(23). 被引量:3
  • 2刘忠雷,齐振文.旅店业卫生监督量化分级管理初探[J].宜春学院学报,2005,27(2):72-73. 被引量:5
  • 3张向阳,张文,陈毓雄,钟伟铃.公共场所经营单位开展卫生监督量化分级管理工作初探[J].广东药学院学报,2005,21(6):732-734. 被引量:10
  • 4段杏丽,崔力争.创新卫生监督管理 促进卫生事业发展[J].医学动物防制,2006,22(2):146-147. 被引量:2
  • 5武书连 吕嘉 郭石林.中国高等教育评估[J].科学学与科学技术管理,1997,:49-73.
  • 6World Health Organization. Patient monitoring guidelines for HIV care and antiretroviral therapy. Geneva: World Health Organization,2004.
  • 7Moussa A, Bridges-Webb C. Quality of care in general practice : A Delphi study of indicators and methods. Aust Fam Physician, 1994,23 : 465-468,472-473.
  • 8GaUagher M, Bradshaw C, Nattress H. Policy priorities in diabetes care: a Delphi study. Q ual Health Care,1996,5:3-8.
  • 9Millar G. The development of indicators for sustainable tourism: results of a Delphi survey of tourism researchers. Tourism Management, 2002, 22:351-362.
  • 10Schuster MA, Asch SM, McGlynn EA, et al. Development of a quality of care measurement system for children and adolescents.Methodological considerations and comparisons with a system for adult women. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, 1997, 151 : 1085-1092.

共引文献293

同被引文献150

引证文献22

二级引证文献186

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部