Résumés
Résumé
La formation à la gestion et à la tolérance à l’incertitude ou à l’ambiguïté dans le soin est un enjeu pédagogique majeur des études médicales. S’il existe de nombreux outils en anglais permettant l’évaluation de cette dimension, aucun questionnaire en français n’a jusqu’à présent fait l’objet d’une évaluation de ses preuves de validité. L’objectif de ce travail est de produire une version en français de l’échelle Tolerance of Ambiguity in Medical Students And Doctors (TAMSAD) et de présenter les preuves de validité sur les scores obtenus avec cette échelle. Le questionnaire original a d’abord été traduit, puis adapté culturellement. Cette version en français a été soumise à un échantillon d’étudiants en médecine afin de réaliser une analyse psychométrique reposant sur l’évaluation de la consistance interne. Le questionnaire a été passé à deux reprises par les mêmes étudiants afin de tester la stabilité test-retest. Les alphas de Cronbach, mesurés au test et au retest, reflètent une bonne consistance interne. La stabilité test-retest est vérifiée par des corrélations intraclasses dont les résultats sont en faveur d’une bonne reproductibilité des résultats à la première et à la seconde passations. Nos résultats indiquent que notre version en français de la TAMSAD peut être utilisée pour évaluer la tolérance à l’ambiguïté des étudiants en médecine.
Mots-clés :
- tolérance à l’ambiguïté,
- incertitude,
- échelle d’évaluation TAMSAD,
- pédagogie médicale,
- épistémologie
Abstract
Preparing students to deal with and tolerate uncertainty or ambiguity is a major issue in medical education. There are many English scales to assess tolerance of uncertainty and ambiguity but no French one has ever demonstrated validity evidence for its scores. We selected the Tolerance of Ambiguity in Medical Students And Doctors scale. In a structured process, the original questionnaire was translated, culturally adapted and assessed after administering it to a sample of medical students. Test-retest reliability was tested by presenting the questionnaire to the students again after two months. The assessment of internal consistency reveals satisfactory value. Test-retest reliability is assessed by intraclass correlation that presents good reproducibility of scores obtained by students in first completion and second completion. These results indicate that the French version of the TAMSAD scale can be used to assess French medical students’ tolerance to ambiguity.
Keywords:
- tolerance of ambiguity,
- uncertainty,
- TAMSAD evaluation scale,
- medical education,
- epistemology
Resumo
A formação na gestão e na tolerância da incerteza ou ambiguidade no cuidado é um grande desafio pedagógico nos estudos médicos. Embora existam muitas ferramentas em inglês que permitem avaliar esta dimensão, nenhum questionário em francês foi até agora objeto de avaliação de sua validade. O objetivo deste trabalho é produzir uma versão francesa da escala Tolerance of Ambiguity in Medical Students And Doctors (TAMSAD) e apresentar as evidências de validade dos resultados obtidos com esta escala. O questionário original foi primeiramente traduzido e depois adaptado culturalmente. Esta versão francesa foi submetida a uma amostra de estudantes de medicina para a realização de uma análise psicométrica baseada na avaliação da consistência interna. O questionário foi aplicado duas vezes pelos mesmos estudantes para testar a estabilidade teste-reteste. Os alfas de Cronbach, medidos no teste e reteste, refletem uma boa consistência interna. A estabilidade teste-reteste é verificada por correlações intraclasse, cujos resultados suportam boa reprodutibilidade dos resultados na primeira e segunda rondas. Os nossos resultados indicam que a nossa versão francesa do TAMSAD pode ser usada para avaliar a tolerância à ambiguidade de estudantes de medicina.
Palavras chaves:
- tolerância à ambiguidade,
- incerteza,
- escala de classificação TAMSAD,
- pedagogia médica,
- epistemologia
Parties annexes
Références
- Babrow, A. S., Kasch, C. R., & Ford, L. A. (1998). The many meanings of uncertainty in illness: Toward a systematic accounting. Health Communication, 10(1), 1‑23. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327027hc1001_1
- Béland, S. & Michelot, F. (2020). Une note sur le coefficient oméga (ω) et ses déclinaisons pour estimer la fidélité des scores. Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 43(3), 103‑122. https://doi.org/10.7202/1084526ar
- Beresford, E. B. (1991). Uncertainty and the shaping of medical decisions. The Hastings Center Report, 21(4), 6‑11. https://doi.org/10.2307/3562993
- Biehn, J. (1982). Managing uncertainty in family practice. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 126(8), 915‑917.
- Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, 30, 29‑50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1962.tb02303.x
- Charlin, B. (2006). Évaluer la dimension d’incertitude du raisonnement clinique. Pédagogie Médicale, 7(1), 5‑6. https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed:2006025
- Charlin, B., Gagnon, R., Kazi-Tani, D. & Thivierge, R. (2005). Le test de concordance comme outil d’évaluation en ligne du raisonnement des professionnels en situation d’incertitude. Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire, 2(2), 22‑27. https://doi.org/10.18162/ritpu.2005.79
- Cooke, S., & Lemay, J.-F. (2017). Transforming medical assessment: Integrating uncertainty into the evaluation of clinical reasoning in medical education. Academic Medicine, 92(6), 746-751. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001559
- Downing, S. M. (2003). Validity: On meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Medical Education, 37(9), 830‑837. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003.01594.x
- Eastwood, J. L., Koppelman-White, E., Mi, M., Wasserman, J. A., Krug III, E. F., & Joyce, B. (2017). Epistemic cognition in medical education: A literature review. International Journal of Medical Education, 8, 1‑12. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5849.bfce
- Fox, R. C. (1980). The evolution of medical uncertainty. The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly: Health and Society, 58(1), 1‑49. https://doi.org/10.2307/3349705
- Furnham, A., & Ribchester, T. (1995). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology, 14, 179‑199. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686907
- Geller, G., Faden, R. R., & Levine, D. M. (1990). Tolerance for ambiguity among medical students: Implications for their selection, training and practice. Social Science & Medicine, 31(5), 619‑624. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(90)90098-D
- Geller, G., Tambor, E. S., Chase, G. A., & Holtzman, N. A. (1993). Measuring physicians’ tolerance for ambiguity and its relationship to their reported practices regarding genetic testing. Medical Care, 31(11), 989‑1001. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199311000-00002
- Gerrity, M. S., DeVellis, R. F., & Earp, J. A. (1990). Physicians’ reactions to uncertainty in patient care: A new measure and new insights. Medical Care, 28(8), 724‑736. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199008000-00005
- Gheihman, G., Johnson, M., & Simpkin, A. L. (2019). Twelve tips for thriving in the face of clinical uncertainty. Medical Teacher, 42(5), 493-499. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2019.1579308
- Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C., & Beaton, D. (1993). Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(12), 1417‑1432. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-n
- Han, P. K. J., Babrow, A., Hillen, M. A., Gulbrandsen, P., Smets, E. M., & Ofstad, E. H. (2019). Uncertainty in health care: Towards a more systematic program of research. Patient Education and Counseling, 102(10), 1756‑1766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2019.06.012
- Han, P. K. J., Klein, W. M. P., & Arora, N. K. (2011). Varieties of uncertainty in health care: A conceptual taxonomy. Medical Decision Making, 31(6), 828‑838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X11393976
- Han, P. K. J., Schupack, D., Daggett, S., Holt, C. T., & Strout, T. D. (2015). Temporal changes in tolerance of uncertainty among medical students: Insights from an exploratory study. Medical Education Online, 20(1), 28285. https://doi.org/10.3402/meo.v20.28285
- Hancock, J., Roberts, M., Monrouxe, L., & Mattick, K. (2015). Medical student and junior doctors’ tolerance of ambiguity: Development of a new scale. Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice, 20(1), 113‑130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-014-9510-z
- Hillen, M. A., Gutheil, C. M., Strout, T. D., Smets, E. M. A., & Han, P. K. J. (2017). Tolerance of uncertainty: Conceptual analysis, integrative model, and implications for healthcare. Social Science & Medicine, 180, 62‑75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.024
- Kalke, K., Studd, H., & Scherr, C. L. (2021). The communication of uncertainty in health: A scoping review. Patient Education and Counseling, 104(8), 1945‑1961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.01.034
- Ledford, C. J. W., Seehusen, D. A., Chessman, A. W., & Shokar, N. K. (2015). How we teach U.S. medical students to negotiate uncertainty in clinical care: A CERA study. Family Medicine, 47(1), 31‑36.
- Motte, B., Aiguier, G., Vanpee, D. et Cobbaut, J.-P. (2020). Mieux comprendre l’incertitude en médecine pour former les médecins. Pédagogie Médicale, 21(1), 39‑51. https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed/2020025
- Noiriel, G. (1994). John Dewey, Logique : la théorie de l’enquête [compte-rendu]. Genèses: Sciences sociales et histoire, 17(1), 168‑169. https://isidore.science/document/10670/1.j7vf4g
- Politi, M. C., & Légaré, F. (2010). Physicians’ reactions to uncertainty in the context of shared decision making. Patient Education and Counseling, 80(2), 155‑157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2009.10.030
- Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2010). Introduction to psychometric theory. Routledge.
- Russel, S. M., Geraghty, J. R., Renaldy, H., Thompson, T. M., & Hirshfield, L. E. (2021). Training for professional uncertainty: Socialization of medical students through the residency application process. Academic Medicine, 96(11S), S144-S150. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004303
- Schön, D. A. (2011). À la recherche d’une nouvelle épistémologie de la pratique et de ce qu’elle implique pour l’éducation des adultes. Presses universitaires de France.
- Schweizer, K. (2011). On the changing role of Cronbach’s α in the evaluation of the quality of a measure. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(3), 143‑144. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000069
- Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273‑1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
10.7202/1084526ar