Search

This scoping review explores the professional literature in allied healthcare to determine which self-assessments of mentor skills are the most valid and reliable for use in occupational therapy doctoral capstone programs. The aims of this scoping review include mapping evidence related to mentor assessments in healthcare, exploring implications for occupational therapy doctoral mentor training programs, and identifying common characteristics of mentor self-assessments for occupational therapy programs to consider when developing capstone mentoring resources. Researchers applied and reported via PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A librarian and authors formulated keywords and database selections to search PubMed/MEDLINE/PMC, and Embase were searched from across healthcare professions for training outcomes, mentor self-assessment, mentor attributes, and use of researcher-developed assessments. The search was limited to English publications from the last 20 years. Data were extracted for quantitative information regarding study characteristics and qualitative information about mentoring skills. A total of 852 results were delivered across all databases. Nineteen papers met the final eligibility criteria and were included in the data extraction. Populations were included from several healthcare professions, including 11 nursing, four healthcare researchers, one pharmacy, one midwifery, one medicine, and one medical dietetics. Countries included the United States (n = 7), Finland (n = 5), United Kingdom (n = 4), Japan (n = 1), South Africa (n = 1) and Canada (n = 1). The authors identified four valid self-assessment tools, demonstrating III and IV levels of evidence, that may be implemented by occupational therapy programs as they develop resources for mentor programs. Occupational therapy programs can use the mentor attributes found in this scoping review to create their own mentor assessment measures or may choose to use a validated tool. The authors recommend additional research in mentor education and mentor skill acquisition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical trials for the treatment of schizophrenia now often include cognitive assessments in addition to clinical ratings of symptoms. Recently, these trials have included cross-national assessments. It is not clear if translated psychological tests produce consistent results across different languages. This paper presents the results of a study of the comparability of the results of cognitive assessments in different English-speaking countries and a number of countries where tests were translated into other languages. Performance on tests of executive functioning, verbal and visuo-spatial learning and memory, language skills, psychomotor speed, and vigilance was compared across the first episode patients with schizophrenia (n=301) assessed in six different languages (English, French, Finnish, German, Hebrew, and Afrikaans), including two different countries where patients were assessed in English and other languages: Canada (French) and South Africa (Afrikaans). The variance in performance across the sites tested in English was as large as the variance between English and non-English speakers when all tests were considered. Performance differences across English and other languages were found only for executive functions, vigilance, and psychomotor speed, with executive functioning differences nonsignificant when education was considered. No differences were found between English and non-English speakers in Canada. These results suggest that the translation of tests of memory and verbal skills can lead to consistent results across translated versions of the tests. Differences between countries were greater than differences between languages, suggesting the need to consider representativeness of patient samples in terms of local educational attainment. In general, these data support the validity of cross-national neuropsychological assessments. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]