目的 了解某军校2008级研究生临床流行病学病因学大课的授课效果,为改进授课效果提供借鉴.方法 上课前后采用统一问卷对学生病因学内容掌握情况进行调查,问卷采用是非判断题形式共10道.结果 博士生考查"混杂"、"配比"、"病因研究作用"3道题目授课前后正确率差异无统计学意义(P ＞ 0.05),其余7题授课前后正确率差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05);不同性别、培养方式、专业博士生授课前后考查总分差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05).硕士生考查"配比"、"回忆偏倚"、"暴露人年数"等概念的题目授课前后正确率差异无统计学意义(P ＞ 0.05),考查"OR值"、"队列研究论证强度"的题目正确率较上课前下降(P < 0.05).在职硕士授课前后总分差异无统计学意义(P ＞ 0.05).结论 该年级博士生在"混杂"、"配比"、"病因研究方法"等方面需进一步加强授课效果,而硕士生在"混杂"、"回忆偏倚"、"暴露人年数"、"OR值"、"病因研究作用"等基本概念方面仍需进一步加深理解.%Objective To investigate the teaching effects of etiology of clinical epidemiology in the class of 2008 graduate students in a military college, in order to provide reference for improvement of the teaching effects.Methods Before and after the class, the same questionnaire included 10 items true-false types were used for investigation.Results For doctor students, the correct rates of "confounding", "matching", "causation of disease" items had no statistically significant differences between before and after the class (P > 0.05); the correct rates of other 7 questions had statistically significant differences (P < 0.05).Before and after the class, the total scores of doctors with different sex, cultivating mode, profession had statistically significant differences (P < 0.05).For master students, the correct rates of "matching", "recall bias", "cohort study" and "exposed population years" items had no statistically significant differences between before and after the class (P > 0.05); then the correct rates of "odds ratio", "argument strength of cohort study" were decreased.Before and after the class, the total score had no statistically significant differences in on -the-job postgraduate students (P > 0.05).Conclusion Items of "confounding", "matching", "causation of disease" need to be emphasized in doctor students' class, Items of "confounding", "recall bias", "cohort study", "exposed population years", "odds ratio", "causation of disease" need to be emphasized in master students' class.
展开▼
