The research and application of quantitative evaluation method for senior health titles are as follows:
In order to establish a professional, quantitative and second-level professional title evaluation method with comprehensive investigation of morality, ability and performance, through extensive investigation, repeated discussion and testing, and refinement of quantitative indicators and weights, a quantitative evaluation method for senior professional titles was established, which meets the needs of hospital development, with strict evaluation procedures, supervision mechanism and public evaluation results. This method has been applied for four years, which avoids many disadvantages encountered in the previous evaluation of senior professional titles, truly examines the technical ability and performance of professional and technical personnel, and weakens the problem of professional title evaluation caused by different hospital grades and geographical distribution. The quantitative evaluation method embodies fairness, justice and openness, points out the direction of efforts for the professional development of professional and technical personnel, and has been widely recognized by relevant departments and professional and technical personnel.
Keywords: quantitative specialization of professional title evaluation in enterprise hospitals
As a large enterprise with 9 3A hospitals, more than 50 secondary hospitals and nearly 100 hospitals below secondary level, as well as health disease control and occupational disease prevention institutions, medical units are distributed in more than 20 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions. Different geographical conditions have brought about the unbalanced development of health technology among medical units, and the evaluation of senior health titles has encountered many thorny problems [1]. In the past four years, the professional, quantitative and two-level evaluation methods have mobilized the enthusiasm of the majority of health professional and technical personnel to scientifically design their careers and strive to develop their personal technical level. The effect of professional title evaluation has been widely recognized by all levels of vocational reform departments and professional and technical personnel, and satisfactory results have been achieved.
1 evaluation method
1. 1 professional evaluation
According to the professional category, the professional and technical personnel are divided into five professional groups to organize evaluation, namely clinical medicine, traditional Chinese medicine and integrated traditional Chinese and western medicine, medical auxiliary technology, preventive medicine and comprehensive (pharmacy, nursing, etc.). ). If the number of applicants in a professional group is less than 10, it will be merged into other professional groups for review; If the number of applicants in a professional group exceeds 150, it will be divided into two professional groups for review. According to different majors, the quantitative standards with different emphases are formulated.
1.2 two-level review
1.2. 1 recommended audit recommended audit by the medical unit affiliated to the branch-level enterprise transformation office. Firstly, the qualification of applicants who meet the application conditions is examined, and then a recommendation review meeting is organized to quantitatively score the applicant's ability and performance according to quantitative standards, and the quantitative results are obtained.
1.2.2 Before the evaluation meeting, all bureau-level enterprises will report the recommended evaluation results and the applicant's evaluation materials to the title evaluation office, and the evaluation office will organize full-time personnel to review the submitted materials, mainly including: ① the authenticity of the submitted materials; Whether it meets the basic conditions for declaration; (3) Make a preliminary quantitative score on academic qualifications, qualifications, foreign languages, computers, articles, scientific research and other performance indicators. In addition, the accreditation office will also group all applicants' materials by major and sort them by quantitative results. The review meeting is divided into two procedures: ① professional group meeting, in which five professional groups evaluate and quantify the applicants in their professional groups respectively, and eliminate some applicants with poor performance according to the quantitative scoring results, form professional group review opinions and report them to the jury; (2) The jury will review the review process and results submitted by the five professional groups one by one, and then eliminate some applicants with poor performance in proportion to form the final review results.
1.3 combination of basic application conditions and quantitative evaluation
1.3. 1 Basic application conditions set basic conditions for the applicant's moral character, education, qualifications, foreign languages, annual assessment results, scientific research and papers, corporate services and other achievements. For those who do not meet the basic requirements in terms of academic qualifications and qualifications, the conditions for exceptional reporting shall be set, and the requirements for articles and scientific research for exceptional reporting shall be relatively improved.
1.3.2 In terms of quantitative evaluation, the Vocational Reform Department and the Evaluation Department of the Evaluation Committee, which recommended the evaluation, have successively conducted material review and preliminary evaluation. At the recommendation review meeting, professional group meeting and review meeting, the review committee reviewed the materials again and rechecked the accuracy of the review. The recommendation evaluation meeting and the evaluation meeting are sorted according to the quantitative total score, and the recommendation evaluation results and evaluation results are obtained respectively, and the vote of confidence is cast according to the sorted results.
2 Quantitative indicators and weight sets
2. 1 quantification of basic indicators
2. 1. 1 Education is scored according to the highest education and degree obtained by the applicant. Doctoral students 10, doctoral degree only 9 points, master students 8 points, master students 7 points, undergraduate students 6 points, those without degrees 5 points, exceptional evaluation 0 ~ 1 point.
2. 1.2 The qualification shall be calculated from the date when the applicant obtains the current post qualification to 65438+February 3 1 day of the year when the qualification of the next higher post is to be evaluated. Cumulative 1 year, 1 minute, full mark1minute.
2. 1.3 foreign languages and computers require applicants to take the national health series foreign languages and computers examination for senior titles and pass the examination. What is the score? 0. 1 used for quantization.
2. 1.4 the annual assessment and honor of the unit shall be evaluated according to the results of the applicant's annual work assessment in the past three years and the honorary title of labor or technology related to professional technology obtained during his current work. Annual assessment is an annual assessment of the political ideology, technical ability and work performance of professional and technical personnel. The annual assessment results of the last three years? Qualified? Five points? Excellent? 1 time plus 1 point, according to the honorary titles related to professional and technical work such as model worker and excellent teacher, 0.5 ~ 2.0 points will be given according to different levels such as national, provincial and ministerial level.
2. 1.5 Scientific research is scored quantitatively according to government awards such as national, provincial and ministerial science and technology awards, natural science awards, technological invention awards, scientific and technological progress awards and technological innovation awards, as shown in Table 1. Non-governmental awards, such as those assessed by medical units, associations and societies, will not be scored at the judging meeting.
2. 1.6 Papers and works are graded according to the nature, grade, paper category and authors rank of the published journals, as shown in Table 2-4. Single paper score =4? What is the natural weight of periodicals? What is the weight of periodical grade and paper category? Ranking weight.
The requirement of the work is a scientific monograph or translation with academic value and related to this major. The editorial board of teaching materials in medical colleges scores according to the weight of the first author of Chinese core journals, that is, 4 points; Editor-in-chief of other works or translations shall be scored according to the weight of the first author of the central core journal. The weight of the score is related to the number of words in the applicant's translation part. If the chapters translated by the author are not clearly marked in the book, it is impossible to count the number of words written by individuals. Click? 0.8? Total words/author? Do the math. Actual score of single book =3.2? Author's score weight (excluding medical college textbooks). See Table 5.
2. 1.7 teaching is graded according to the workload and teaching effect of the applicants who undertake continuing medical education courses, postgraduate, undergraduate and specialist teaching tasks.
2. 1.8 Recommended evaluation results This indicator is only used for evaluation. Based on what? The total score of professional and technical personnel by each unit at the recommendation review meeting-the average score of recommendation review of all applicants in this unit is +50? Quantify one tenth.
2. 1.9 continuing medical education and professional and technical examination This indicator is only used for recommendation review. Participants are required to complete the credit requirements of continuing medical education every year and take various technical examinations (such as? Miki? The qualified scores in the exam are directly quantified by the average scores of technical exams in the past three years [2].
2.2 Evaluation indicators
2.2. 1 Personal technical level and ability According to the applicant's report on work, disease diagnosis and treatment, surgery, technical operation, case data and scientific and technological data of new technology projects that have been carried out, combined with technical and environmental factors such as corresponding years and regions, the technical level of the applicant is compared and evaluated within the professional group.
2.2.2 Classification of technical post responsibilities, workload and work quality, focusing on professional technical post performance, workload and work quality report, work performance and achievements, and evaluating with reference to medical treatment, teaching, scientific research level and created economic and social benefits within the professional group.
2.2.3 Academic influence Academic influence is evaluated from three aspects. First, learn to wait for social part-time jobs. The society is limited to the national first-class association for science and technology and its professional groups and provincial and municipal branches. 65,438+00 points for members of the National Academic Committee or bureau-level academic leaders, 8-65,438+00 points for members of provincial academic committees or department-level academic leaders, 6-8 points for members of municipal bureau-level academic committees or department-level academic leaders, 4-6 points for academic leaders of their own units, and 0-4 points for others. The chairman and other academic (community) leaders are quantified according to the upper limit of the scoring value, and the vice-chairman and other major members of the academic (community) are graded as appropriate, and the members are graded as appropriate, but the members are not graded. Two, the professional and technical positions need to be organized in clinical, teaching, scientific research, health, management and other work, with the appointment letter score (such as department director, teaching secretary, head nurse, etc.). ) or valid certification materials. Third, academic activities or work organized at one time. Relevant supporting documents need to be provided, such as scientific research projects at or above the provincial and ministerial level, proof of achievements, etc., which are limited to the main researchers. 2.2.4 The debriefing defense not only examines the quality of the defense paper, but also evaluates it according to the journal level, influence, article category, authors rank, whether the article design is reasonable, whether the argument is rigorous and practical, and its relevance to the specialty, and also combines the applicant's on-site debriefing defense, especially the situation of answering questions (generally not less than three questions are related to the professional basis, professional application and new academic progress of the defense paper).
2.2.5 Professional and technical working environment and conditions refer to the application materials provided by the applicant. At the same time, the technical working environment of the applicant's unit and department should be considered and compared within the professional group according to one to five grades. See Table 6.
2.3 setting of weight
2.3. 1 Basic indicators are scored according to the basic performance of the applicant, which mainly reflects the applicant's academic qualifications, qualifications, foreign languages, computers, annual assessment and honors, ability to complete continuing medical education and performance foundation, as well as scientific research, papers, teaching ability, recommended evaluation results, etc. , the weight * * * accounts for 55% of the total score.
2.3.2 The evaluation index is scored according to the applicant's personal technical level and ability, technical post responsibilities and workload, work quality, academic influence, debriefing defense, professional and technical working environment and conditions, etc., reflecting the applicant's actual working ability and professional and technical level, and the judges will score, with the weight accounting for 45% of the total score.
3 Contradictory analysis and policy response
3. 1 Problems caused by different geographical distribution
Because the health institutions affiliated to the enterprise are distributed in more than 20 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions, the working conditions and technical level of medical units in northwest China such as Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia are not as good as those in southeast China as a whole, and it is more difficult for people working in hospitals in remote areas to achieve better results in scientific research, teaching and papers than those working in metropolises. In the evaluation index, due consideration should be given to the service for enterprises and geographical factors.
3.2 Problems caused by different levels of hospitals
In the health work of enterprises, tertiary hospitals are responsible for the treatment of major diseases, and hospitals below secondary hospitals are also very important for medical services for employees and their families. Considering the different levels of hospitals and the different working environments of professional and technical personnel, it is difficult for small health institutions to make achievements in scientific research and teaching. There are two criteria for setting the index weight: 3A hospitals and non-3A hospitals. The academic qualifications, qualifications, foreign languages, computers, annual assessment, honors, workload and work quality of non-3A hospitals are more important, while scientific research, papers and teaching are less important.
3.3 The question of whether the jury can reply on the spot.
Because the personnel are scattered all over the country, it is difficult to unify the on-site debriefing and defense, and the jury will not conduct on-site debriefing and defense. By asking the recommended jury to organize on-site debriefing defense, the on-site debriefing defense score and total score of the recommended jury will be included in the jury score (accounting for about 20% of the final evaluation score), and the quality of the defense papers recommended for evaluation will be re-graded as one of the indicators of the evaluation results, which makes up for the shortage of on-site defense.
4 Effect and experience
4. 1 Publish the quantification standard in advance
It points out the direction of professional title evaluation and career efforts for health professional and technical personnel, which is conducive to the training of professional and technical personnel and the development of medical institutions [3]. The setting of academic qualifications, foreign languages and computer indicators has strengthened the learning motivation of professional and technical personnel; The setting of indicators such as annual assessment, workload, work quality and new technology projects (based on medical records) makes professional and technical personnel pay more attention to their daily work; Teaching, scientific research, papers, academic influence and other indicators make everyone pay more attention to the cultivation of teaching and scientific research ability, the summary and exchange of clinical experience; The requirements of professional and technical level promote the motivation of professional and technical personnel to learn business [4]; The setting of indicators such as key disciplines and professional technical working environment has promoted the continuous development of hospitals and disciplines.
4.2 Fair, just and open.
Procedural justice and result justice are the rational demands of professional and technical personnel for the professional title evaluation system [5]. Establish an expert database of judges, take all the personnel with senior titles in the enterprise as members of the expert database, and randomly select judges; Professional evaluation, grouping applicants and judges of similar majors relatively centrally; Quantitative evaluation and secondary evaluation; Refine the "evaluation criteria" and the specific scores of judges' ability and performance when scoring? Strong rigidity and small elasticity? Publicize the evaluation conditions, recommended evaluation and quantitative evaluation results of all applicants. Each applicant can see his comprehensive score and ranking among all applicants, his achievements and shortcomings in various quantitative evaluations, and file the electronic version of the title evaluation materials for future reference [6], which increases the transparency of title evaluation and improves the support and recognition of the majority of applicants for title evaluation. In addition, through the weight setting, the unbalanced development of professional and technical personnel caused by different regions and different hospital grades has been reduced to some extent. It embodies the fairness of procedures and results.
4.3 Pay attention to the daily work ability, professional and technical level and other work achievements [7]
? Miki? The setting of technical assessment, professional technical level, work quality, annual assessment, honor and other indicators, as well as the method of recommending assessment results and defense results into the total assessment results, have changed the situation of previous papers and scientific research results assessment results. In the application materials, it is required to fill in medical records, scientific research task books and other materials that can represent personal technical level, which corrects the working attitude of health technicians that they should study hard, develop new technologies, do their daily work in a down-to-earth manner and correctly handle technical problems, and changes the working style of some professional technicians that only pay attention to scientific research and papers, but not to the progress of daily work and daily technical work.
4.4 Strict quantitative evaluation
Quantitative evaluation can comprehensively evaluate the applicant's ability and performance, which changes the disadvantage that evaluation experts can only form perceptual knowledge of the applicant's academic qualifications, qualifications, foreign languages, published articles, etc., reduces the subjective factors of the judges, can form specific and rigid evaluation conclusions on the applicant's performance, and avoids many contradictions and disadvantages such as excessive flexibility in determining the evaluation results. The evaluation conclusions can be widely recognized by the applicants.
4.5 Strict review of discipline
The Certification Office and the Certification and Accreditation Committee of the professional group check the authenticity of the certification materials to ensure the fairness of the certification process and results. In the evaluation process, the bureau-level enterprise vocational reform department reports the applicant's application materials and recommended evaluation results to the title evaluation office, and the full-time staff of the evaluation office reviews the submitted materials three times, clarifies and publicizes the catalogue of core journals [8], retrieves and verifies the achievements of papers, works and scientific research awards [9- 10], and quantifies the basic indicators. In the past four years, we have gradually put an end to the phenomenon of falsification of papers, scientific research, teaching and other achievements, and put an end to the phenomenon of illegal journals and supplements replacing regular journals. At the review meeting of the professional group, the judges of the professional group will review the materials in the review room, check the scores of basic indicators, and score the evaluation indicators one by one. For each applicant, the chief examiner and deputy examiner should be clearly defined. If there is any violation in the whole audit process, the responsibility of the chief auditor and the deputy auditor will be investigated. At the end of the meeting of the review committee, the work of the review office and the review work of the professional group were verified. Through the above measures, fraud and irregularities in the evaluation of professional titles have been eliminated. 4.6 Scientific setting of quantitative indicators and weights
The setting of quantitative indicators and their weights is the core and key to establish a reasonable quantitative evaluation method [1 1- 13]. This study * * * set 14 indicators and more than 20 aspects, including the professional technical ability, work undertaken and performance of health technicians. Before setting the indicators and weights, we paid attention to the work performance, solicited the opinions of experts from various medical institutions and vocational reform departments, and consulted the document requirements and related literature reports of professional title evaluation in various provinces and cities. Before the formal implementation of the Measures, experts were organized to conduct a simulation review, and the Measures were repeatedly revised and widely publicized to ensure that there were no major defects in the formal implementation of the Measures.
[References]
[1] Huang, Shi Feng,. Problems and countermeasures in the evaluation and engagement of hospital professional titles [J]. China Journal of Hospital Management, 2008,24 (6): 375-377,412.
[2], Wang Dong, Xu, et al. Clinical skills assessment? The practice of including the evaluation of the promotion of doctors' professional titles [J]. China Hospital, 2007, 1 1 (5): 45-47.
[3] Zhou. My opinion on the declaration of professional titles of health professionals [J]. Heilongjiang Science and Technology Information, 20 12, (2): 148.
[4] Bai Yi. Significance of strengthening clinical skills assessment in professional title evaluation for clinical team building [J]. china journal of modern medicine, 2007,17 (12):1531-1532.
[5] Yu Xinglong. Research on Building a Fair-oriented Professional Title Evaluation System [J]. China Administration, 20 1 1, (1 1): 77-80.
[6] Li Yinqing, Qiu Ruhua. Reflections on the filing of professional title materials under the background of informationization [J]. Lantai World, 20 1 1, (6): 14- 15.
[7] Ding Zhiming, Xu Xiangrong, Xu Jian. Practical experience of professional title promotion and grading system in our college [J]. China Journal of Hospital Management, 20 1 1, 27 (3): 2 18-220.
[8] Tan Changyong, Zhao Fei, Peng Guoli. The main problems and countermeasures in the identification of core journals in the evaluation of professional titles in colleges and universities —— Taking the evaluation of professional titles in colleges and universities in Sichuan Province as an example [J]. Journal of Sichuan Library, 2012,34 (3): 97-100.
[9], Cui Yun, Gao. Practice and thinking on academic retrieval of professional title evaluation materials in colleges and universities [J]. Agricultural Books journal of the china society for scientific and technical information, 2012,24 (5): 223-224.
[10] Yi Ying. Application and discussion of quantitative scoring model in the evaluation of professional and technical titles [J]. Human resource management, 2012,7 (5): 62-63.
Li Choi Wha. How to declare the technical title of health specialty [J]. Modern Hospital, September 2009 (1):134-135.
Lin and Li Qihe. Experience and thinking of implementing the appointment system for professional and technical posts [J]. Modern Hospital, 20 10,10 (1):128-129.
Dongguan Library entered without reservation. You can enter as long as you have an ID card. Dongguan Library, located in the central square o