摘要:
目的 比较中高级职称药剂人员对军队药剂专业高级技术职务任职标准的看法。 方法 通过德尔菲法组织两轮专家函询,比较不同职称者最终赋予各指标权重的差异。 结果 不同职称者对一级指标的看法基本一致,认为最重要的是药剂工作、专业知识(Kendall协和系数W=0.906,P=0.107),对二级指标专业知识、药剂工作、教学工作的意见基本一致(W=1,P=0.092;W=1,P=0.157;W=1,P=0.135)。对二级指标思想品德、科研工作、三级指标药剂工作数量、药剂工作质量、教学成果的看法不一致(W=0.75,P=0.223;W=0.75,P=0.223;W=0.75,P=0.223;W=0.1,P=0.896;W=0,P=1)。 结论 不同职称人员的看法有偏差,尤其是在药剂工作质量和教学成果的考量方面,中级职称者更看重短期指标如文章等;高级职称者更看重长期积累指标如教学奖励等。要进一步深入分析专家的不同意见,建立科学的军队药剂专业高级技术职务任职标准。
Abstract:
Objective To compare different experts' opinions about pharmaceutical specialists'credentials for military superior technical position. Methods Delphi method was taken to organize two rounds of specialist consultations, the final opinions of specialists with different professional ranks were compared on the index weights. Results In comparison of opinions about six first-level indicators (W=0.906, P=0.107), the specialists agreed that pharmaceutical work and professional knowledge were the most important. For the second-level indicators like professional knowledge, pharmaceutical work and teaching, the opinions were also consistent (W=1, P=0.092; W=1, P=0.157; W=1, P=0.135). For the second-level indicators like ideology and mortality, scientific research and the third-level indicators like quantity of pharmaceutical work, quality of pharmaceutical work and teaching achievements, the opinions were different(W=0.75, P=0.223; W=0.75, P=0.223; W=0.75, P=0.223;W=0.1, P=0.896; W=0, P=1). Conclusion The experts with different professional ranks had different opinions, especially on the aspects of quality of pharmaceutical work and teaching achievements. Those with medium professional titles focused more on shorter term indicators, while those with senior ones focused more on longer term indicators. These suggestions should be appropriately analyzed to build scientific pharmaceutical specialists' credentials for military superior technical position.
点击查看大图
下载:
