论文部分内容阅读
目的:探索虚拟病人在临床医学类专业学位硕士研究生（以下简称“临床专硕研究生”）复试中的应用，为临床专硕研究生复试改革提供参考依据。方法:分析某高校2019年临床专硕研究生复试中97名考生（西医类）临床思维得分与初试临床医学综合能力（西医）得分、复试中面试得分之间的相关性，同时比较应届和往届考生临床思维成绩之间的差异。采用SPSS 21.0软件进行n t检验、卡方检验和Person相关分析。n 结果:相关分析显示，考生的临床思维得分与临床医学综合能力（西医）得分、复试中面试得分之间的相关系数（n r）分别为0.09和-0.05（n P >0.05）；同时，应届和往届考生临床思维成绩之间差异无统计学意义（ n P >0.05）。n 结论:临床思维得分与临床医学综合能力（西医）得分、复试中面试得分之间的关联性较差，考虑与3种考核形式的考核目的差异性较大有关。这为其他医学院校优化复试考核内容提供了参考。“,”Objective:To explore the application of virtual patient in the reexamination of clinical medical professional masters (hereinafter referred to as “clinical masters”), and to provide reference for the reform of clinical masters reexamination.Methods:The correlation between the clinical thinking scores of 97 candidates (Western medicine) in the reexamination of clinical masters in a university in 2019, the scores of comprehensive ability of clinical medicine (Western medicine) in the initial test and the interview scores in the reexamination was analyzed, and the differences between the clinical thinking scores of current and previous candidates were compared. SPSS 21.0 software was conducted for n t test, chi-square test and Pearson correlation analysis.n Results:The Person correlation analysis showed that the correlation coefficient between the scores of clinical thinking and the scores of comprehensive clinical medicine (Western medicine) and the scores of interview in the reexamination were 0.09 and -0.05 respectively(n P>0.05). At the same time, there was no statistically significant difference between the clinical thinking scores of current and previous candidates (n P >0.05).n Conclusion:There was a poor correlation between the scores of clinical thinking and the scores of comprehensive clinical medicine (Western medicine) and the scores of interview in the reexamination. The consideration is concerned with the difference in the purpose of the three assessment forms. It can provide references for other medical colleges to optimize the evaluation content of postgraduate reexamination.