Siti Nurma Hanim Hadie1, Muhamad Saiful Bahri Yusoff2, Wan Nor Arifin3, Fazlina Kasim4, Zul Izhar Mohd Ismail4, Mohd Anizam Asari4, Husnaida Abdul Manan Sulong5, Asma' Hassan6, Tg Fatimah Murniwati Tg Muda6, Yasrul Izad Abu Bakar6, Rasheeda Mohd Zamin7, Elvy Suhana Mohd Ramli8, Rafidah Hod9, Saiful Bahri Talip10, Ku Mastura Ku Mohd Noor11, Yusoff Sharizal Yusoff Azmi Merican12, Muhammad Fairuz Azmi13, Atikah Abdul Latiff14, Madihah Rushaidhi15. 1. Department of Anatomy, School of Medical Sciences, Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, 16150, Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia. snurma@usm.my. 2. Department of Medical Education, School of Medical Sciences, Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia. 3. Biostatistics and Research Methodology Unit, School of Medical Sciences, Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia. 4. Department of Anatomy, School of Medical Sciences, Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, 16150, Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia. 5. Integrative Medicine Cluster, Advanced Medical and Dental Institute, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Bertam, Kepala Batas, Penang, Malaysia. 6. Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Medical Campus, Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu, Malaysia. 7. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 8. Anatomy Department, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre, Cheras, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 9. Medical Education Research and Innovation Unit (MERIU), Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Seri Kembangan, Malaysia. 10. Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Kota Samarahan, Malaysia. 11. Department of Medical Science 1, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Ampang, Selangor, Malaysia. 12. Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Kulliyyah of Medicine, International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia. 13. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Sungai Buloh, Selangor, Malaysia. 14. Anatomy Department, Faculty of Medicine, University of Cyberjaya, Cyberjaya, Selangor, Malaysia. 15. Newcastle University Medicine Malaysia, Iskandar Puteri, Johor, Malaysia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Anatomy Education Environment Measurement Inventory (AEEMI) evaluates the perception of medical students of educational climates with regard to teaching and learning anatomy. The study aimed to cross-validate the AEEMI, which was previously studied in a public medical school, and proposed a valid universal model of AEEMI across public and private medical schools in Malaysia. METHODS: The initial 11-factor and 132-item AEEMI was distributed to 1930 pre-clinical and clinical year medical students from 11 medical schools in Malaysia. The study examined the construct validity of the AEEMI using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. RESULTS: The best-fit model of AEEMI was achieved using 5 factors and 26 items (χ 2 = 3300.71 (df = 1680), P < 0.001, χ 2/df = 1.965, Root Mean Square of Error Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.018, Goodness-of-fit Index (GFI) = 0.929, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.962, Normed Fit Index (NFI) = 0.927, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.956) with Cronbach's alpha values ranging from 0.621 to 0.927. Findings of the cross-validation across institutions and phases of medical training indicated that the AEEMI measures nearly the same constructs as the previously validated version with several modifications to the item placement within each factor. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirmed that variability exists within factors of the anatomy education environment among institutions. Hence, with modifications to the internal structure, the proposed model of the AEEMI can be considered universally applicable in the Malaysian context and thus can be used as one of the tools for auditing and benchmarking the anatomy curriculum.
BACKGROUND: The Anatomy Education Environment Measurement Inventory (AEEMI) evaluates the perception of medical students of educational climates with regard to teaching and learning anatomy. The study aimed to cross-validate the AEEMI, which was previously studied in a public medical school, and proposed a valid universal model of AEEMI across public and private medical schools in Malaysia. METHODS: The initial 11-factor and 132-item AEEMI was distributed to 1930 pre-clinical and clinical year medical students from 11 medical schools in Malaysia. The study examined the construct validity of the AEEMI using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. RESULTS: The best-fit model of AEEMI was achieved using 5 factors and 26 items (χ 2 = 3300.71 (df = 1680), P < 0.001, χ 2/df = 1.965, Root Mean Square of Error Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.018, Goodness-of-fit Index (GFI) = 0.929, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.962, Normed Fit Index (NFI) = 0.927, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.956) with Cronbach's alpha values ranging from 0.621 to 0.927. Findings of the cross-validation across institutions and phases of medical training indicated that the AEEMI measures nearly the same constructs as the previously validated version with several modifications to the item placement within each factor. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirmed that variability exists within factors of the anatomy education environment among institutions. Hence, with modifications to the internal structure, the proposed model of the AEEMI can be considered universally applicable in the Malaysian context and thus can be used as one of the tools for auditing and benchmarking the anatomy curriculum.
Authors: Aaron J Krych; Crystal N March; Ross E Bryan; Ben J Peake; Wojciech Pawlina; Stephen W Carmichael Journal: Clin Anat Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 2.414