从医技学科评估角度探讨研究型医院建设(1)
[摘要] 目的 探討医技学科评估对研究型医院建设的支撑作用。 方法 通过建立医技学科评估指标体系，收集某三甲医院9个医技学科2006—2014年连续3次学科评估数据，分析得分分布及变化情况。 结果 3次学科评估总分比较，差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。第1、2、3次支撑条件得分比较，差异有高度统计学意义(P < 0.01);其他维度得分比较，差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。科研工作、教学工作得分率低于医疗工作、学科队伍、支撑条件得分率，差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。聚类分析结果显示医院医技学科可分为3类，将放射科、检验科列为第1梯队，将超声科、药剂科、护理部和临床医学研究实验室为第2梯队，高压氧科、输血科和病理科为第3梯队。第1梯队各维度得分分布均衡合理;第2梯队各维度评分分布不均衡;第3梯队各维度得分分布呈现较为严重的偏态分布。 结论 3次评估工作较好地反映了学科发展的水平与趋势，科研和教学是医技学科发展的短板，医技学科评估可以作为风向标引导研究型医院建设。
[关键词] 研究型医院;医技学科;学科评估;聚类分析
[中图分类号] R563.1 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1673-7210(2020)08(c)-0173-05
Discussion on the construction of research hospitals from the perspective of medical technology subject evaluation
WANG Meng1 WU Jingjing2 CHEN Lu2 XU Beibei2 REN Peijuan2 WANG Yilong3 ZHANG Lin1
1.Office of Administration， Beijing Tiantan Hospital， Capital Medical University， Beijing 100070， China; 2.Department of Science and Technology， Beijing Tiantan Hospital， Capital Medical University， Beijing 100070， China; 3.Center of Neurology， Beijing Tiantan Hospital， Capital Medical University， Beijing 100070， China
[Abstract] Objective To discuss the supporting role of medical technology subject evaluation in the construction of research hospitals. Methods Through the establishment of an evaluation index system for medical technology disciplines， three consecutive discipline evaluation data of nine medical technology disciplines of a tertiary hospital were collected from 2006 to 2014， while the distribution and changes of scores were analyzed. Results There was no statistically significant difference in the total scores of the three subject assessments (P > 0.05). In the first， second， and third support condition score comparison， and the differences were highly statistically significant (P < 0.01); and the difference in the other dimensions of the score was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The score rate of scientific research work and teaching work were lower than those of medical work， subject team， and supporting conditions， and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The cluster analysis results showed that the hospital′s medical technology disciplines could be divided into three categories. The department of radiology and laboratory were listed as the first echelon， the department of ultrasound， pharmacy， nursing and clinical medical research laboratory were the second echelon， while the department of hyperbaric oxygen， blood transfusion and pathology were the third echelon. The score distribution of each dimension of the first echelon was balanced and reasonable; the score distribution of each dimension of the second echelon was unbalanced; and the score distribution of each dimension of the third echelon showed a more serious skew distribution. Conclusion The discipline evaluation can reflect the level and trend of the development of the disciplines. Scientific research and teaching are the short board of the development of medical technology. Discipline evaluation can be used as a vane to guide the construction of research hospital., http://www.100md.com(王猛 武晶晶 陈璐 徐贝贝 任佩娟 王伊龙 张琳)
[关键词] 研究型医院;医技学科;学科评估;聚类分析
[中图分类号] R563.1 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1673-7210(2020)08(c)-0173-05
Discussion on the construction of research hospitals from the perspective of medical technology subject evaluation
WANG Meng1 WU Jingjing2 CHEN Lu2 XU Beibei2 REN Peijuan2 WANG Yilong3 ZHANG Lin1
1.Office of Administration， Beijing Tiantan Hospital， Capital Medical University， Beijing 100070， China; 2.Department of Science and Technology， Beijing Tiantan Hospital， Capital Medical University， Beijing 100070， China; 3.Center of Neurology， Beijing Tiantan Hospital， Capital Medical University， Beijing 100070， China
[Abstract] Objective To discuss the supporting role of medical technology subject evaluation in the construction of research hospitals. Methods Through the establishment of an evaluation index system for medical technology disciplines， three consecutive discipline evaluation data of nine medical technology disciplines of a tertiary hospital were collected from 2006 to 2014， while the distribution and changes of scores were analyzed. Results There was no statistically significant difference in the total scores of the three subject assessments (P > 0.05). In the first， second， and third support condition score comparison， and the differences were highly statistically significant (P < 0.01); and the difference in the other dimensions of the score was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The score rate of scientific research work and teaching work were lower than those of medical work， subject team， and supporting conditions， and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The cluster analysis results showed that the hospital′s medical technology disciplines could be divided into three categories. The department of radiology and laboratory were listed as the first echelon， the department of ultrasound， pharmacy， nursing and clinical medical research laboratory were the second echelon， while the department of hyperbaric oxygen， blood transfusion and pathology were the third echelon. The score distribution of each dimension of the first echelon was balanced and reasonable; the score distribution of each dimension of the second echelon was unbalanced; and the score distribution of each dimension of the third echelon showed a more serious skew distribution. Conclusion The discipline evaluation can reflect the level and trend of the development of the disciplines. Scientific research and teaching are the short board of the development of medical technology. Discipline evaluation can be used as a vane to guide the construction of research hospital., http://www.100md.com(王猛 武晶晶 陈璐 徐贝贝 任佩娟 王伊龙 张琳)