Caroline J Kistin1, Irene Tien, John M Leventhal, Howard Bauchner. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Boston University School of Medicine/Boston Medical Center, 88 E Newton St, Vose 3, Boston, Massachusetts 02118, USA. caroline.kistin@bmc.org
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a reliable and valid self-evaluation tool for use by child protection team (CPT) members. METHODS: An online survey was administered to members of 10 CPTs. The survey included the following 3 sections: 1) initial conditions (eg, team composition, resources), 2) enabling conditions (eg, team effort, strategy), and 3) team effectiveness (eg, team cohesion, meeting performance standards). Each section contained multiple subscales. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach α. To evaluate construct validity, the subscale scores of the most advanced teams who qualified as centers of excellence (n = 3) were compared with the subscale scores of the other teams (n = 7) to determine whether the tool could distinguish between the two. RESULTS: Of 116 team members, 83 (72%) completed the survey. The subscales exhibited good internal consistency (α = .71-.97). The 3 centers of excellence had significantly higher mean scores than the other 7 CPTs on the following subscales: incentives (in the initial conditions section, 61.46 vs 38.89; P = .003), effort (in the enabling conditions section, 79.31 vs 67.70; P = .003), and professional growth (in the team effectiveness section, 83.89 vs 80.40; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: This novel survey demonstrates satisfactory test characteristics and can be used to assess CPT performance and identify areas for improvement. Copyright Â
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a reliable and valid self-evaluation tool for use by child protection team (CPT) members. METHODS: An online survey was administered to members of 10 CPTs. The survey included the following 3 sections: 1) initial conditions (eg, team composition, resources), 2) enabling conditions (eg, team effort, strategy), and 3) team effectiveness (eg, team cohesion, meeting performance standards). Each section contained multiple subscales. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach α. To evaluate construct validity, the subscale scores of the most advanced teams who qualified as centers of excellence (n = 3) were compared with the subscale scores of the other teams (n = 7) to determine whether the tool could distinguish between the two. RESULTS: Of 116 team members, 83 (72%) completed the survey. The subscales exhibited good internal consistency (α = .71-.97). The 3 centers of excellence had significantly higher mean scores than the other 7 CPTs on the following subscales: incentives (in the initial conditions section, 61.46 vs 38.89; P = .003), effort (in the enabling conditions section, 79.31 vs 67.70; P = .003), and professional growth (in the team effectiveness section, 83.89 vs 80.40; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: This novel survey demonstrates satisfactory test characteristics and can be used to assess CPT performance and identify areas for improvement. Copyright Â
Authors: Risé Jones; Emalee G Flaherty; Helen J Binns; Lori Lyn Price; Eric Slora; Dianna Abney; Donna L Harris; Katherine Kaufer Christoffel; Robert D Sege Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Geoff Debelle; Nikolaos Efstathiou; Rafiyah Khan; Annette Williamson; Manjit Summan; Julie Taylor Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-05 Impact factor: 4.614