Search

The Interprofessional Attitudes Scale (IPAS) is a promising tool for assessing interprofessional education (IPE) attitudes, especially in community-oriented initiatives. To meet the need for validated IPE tools in Vietnam, we translated the IPAS into Vietnamese (Viet-IPAS) and evaluated its psychometric properties. The preparatory phases included forward and backward translation, expert consultations, and student feedback, resulting in strong content validity, face validity, linguistic comprehensibility, and test-retest reliability. During the 2020–2021 academic year, health students from the University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City were invited for the main phase. A total of 282 students from medical, nursing, pharmacy, and rehabilitation science programs completed an online survey using the Viet-IPAS. Cronbach’s alphas for the Teamwork, roles and responsibilities (TRR), Patient-centeredness, Interprofessional biases (IB), Diversity and ethics, and Community-centeredness subscales were .84, .79, .56, .86, and .81, respectively. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated an acceptable fit (normed χ2: 2.618, RMSEA: .076, CFI: .874, AGFI: .77). Factor loadings were above .70, except for IB3 and TRR8 items. Modified models by removing IB subscale and TRR8 item showed slightly improved fit. We recommend using the Viet-IPAS with modifications in Vietnamese health student populations and encourage further review and refinement of the instrument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measuring the effectiveness of interprofessional education (IPE) experiences is essential but challenging. Surveying learners before (pretest) and after (posttest) an IPE experience may result in minimal change due to response shift bias. Retrospective pretest/posttest assessment may ameliorate response shift bias but may also result in inflated change scores due to social desirability bias. We studied a cohort of 675 students from 12 health professions who completed the Interprofessional Attitudes Scale (IPAS) within the 4 weeks before (pretest) and the 3 weeks after (posttest) an IPE forum and completed the Interprofessional Collaborative Competency Attainment Survey (ICCAS) within the 3 weeks after the forum as a retrospective pretest/posttest. We found higher scores on the pretest IPAS than the retrospective pretest ICCAS and greater change in scores on the ICCAS than the IPAS, indicating potential response shift and social desirability biases. Furthermore, we found few significant correlations between change scores in subscales of the two tests, but a high number of strong and significant correlation among the ICCAS subscale change scores. Our results indicate the timing of pretest administration may impact change scores or that subscales of IPAS may be more unique than those of ICCAS. These findings suggest that educators should consider the potential impact of response shift and social desirability biases when interpreting results of the IPAS and ICCAS in response to an IPE learning experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aggressive behavior is traditionally classified into two subtypes, impulsive and premeditated aggression. The Impulsive/Premeditated Aggression Scale (IPAS) is a self-report questionnaire to measure a person's tendency towards these subtypes of aggressive behavior. This study reports on the psychometric quality of the Dutch translation of the IPAS in a sample of 149 male and 70 female prisoners in the Netherlands. Confirmatory Factor Analysis yielded two factors with an item composition quite similar to those found in previous studies: impulsive aggression, 17 items; premeditated aggression, 13 items. For both factors reliable subscales could be composed for males and females: impulsive aggression αmales = .92, αfemales= .94; premeditated aggression αmales = .90 and αfemales = .91. The subscales were highly correlated: αmales = -70, αfemales = .75. It is concluded that the underlying structure of the Dutch version of the IPAS is similar to the original version of the questionnaire, that internal consistency of the two subscales is good, and that the correlation between the two subscales is higher than previously reported. Possible reasons for the high correlation of the subscales are discussed. Additional studies are needed to establish the construct and criterion/predictive validity of the IPAS in the forensic field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]