Cargando…
Psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: The important role of leaders in the translation of health research is acknowledged in the implementation science literature. However, the accurate measurement of leadership traits and behaviours in health professionals has not been directly addressed. This review aimed to identify wheth...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8403357/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34454567 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01141-z |
_version_ | 1783745984103186432 |
---|---|
author | Carlson, Melissa A. Morris, Sarah Day, Fiona Dadich, Ann Ryan, Annika Fradgley, Elizabeth A. Paul, Christine |
author_facet | Carlson, Melissa A. Morris, Sarah Day, Fiona Dadich, Ann Ryan, Annika Fradgley, Elizabeth A. Paul, Christine |
author_sort | Carlson, Melissa A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The important role of leaders in the translation of health research is acknowledged in the implementation science literature. However, the accurate measurement of leadership traits and behaviours in health professionals has not been directly addressed. This review aimed to identify whether scales which measure leadership traits and behaviours have been found to be reliable and valid for use with health professionals. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, CINAHL, Scopus, ABI/INFORMIT and Business Source Ultimate were searched to identify publications which reported original research testing the reliability, validity or acceptability of a leadership-related scale with health professionals. RESULTS: Of 2814 records, a total of 39 studies met the inclusion criteria, from which 33 scales were identified as having undergone some form of psychometric testing with health professionals. The most commonly used was the Implementation Leadership Scale (n = 5) and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (n = 3). Of the 33 scales, the majority of scales were validated in English speaking countries including the USA (n = 15) and Canada (n = 4), but also with some translations and use in Europe and Asia, predominantly with samples of nurses (n = 27) or allied health professionals (n = 10). Only two validation studies included physicians. Content validity and internal consistency were evident for most scales (n = 30 and 29, respectively). Only 20 of the 33 scales were found to satisfy the acceptable thresholds for good construct validity. Very limited testing occurred in relation to test-re-test reliability, responsiveness, acceptability, cross-cultural revalidation, convergent validity, discriminant validity and criterion validity. CONCLUSIONS: Seven scales may be sufficiently sound to be used with professionals, primarily with nurses. There is an absence of validation of leadership scales with regard to physicians. Given that physicians, along with nurses and allied health professionals have a leadership role in driving the implementation of evidence-based healthcare, this constitutes a clear gap in the psychometric testing of leadership scales for use in healthcare implementation research and practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (see Additional File 1) (PLoS Medicine. 6:e1000097, 2009) and the associated protocol has been registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (Registration Number CRD42019121544). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-021-01141-z. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8403357 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84033572021-08-30 Psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review Carlson, Melissa A. Morris, Sarah Day, Fiona Dadich, Ann Ryan, Annika Fradgley, Elizabeth A. Paul, Christine Implement Sci Systematic Review BACKGROUND: The important role of leaders in the translation of health research is acknowledged in the implementation science literature. However, the accurate measurement of leadership traits and behaviours in health professionals has not been directly addressed. This review aimed to identify whether scales which measure leadership traits and behaviours have been found to be reliable and valid for use with health professionals. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, CINAHL, Scopus, ABI/INFORMIT and Business Source Ultimate were searched to identify publications which reported original research testing the reliability, validity or acceptability of a leadership-related scale with health professionals. RESULTS: Of 2814 records, a total of 39 studies met the inclusion criteria, from which 33 scales were identified as having undergone some form of psychometric testing with health professionals. The most commonly used was the Implementation Leadership Scale (n = 5) and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (n = 3). Of the 33 scales, the majority of scales were validated in English speaking countries including the USA (n = 15) and Canada (n = 4), but also with some translations and use in Europe and Asia, predominantly with samples of nurses (n = 27) or allied health professionals (n = 10). Only two validation studies included physicians. Content validity and internal consistency were evident for most scales (n = 30 and 29, respectively). Only 20 of the 33 scales were found to satisfy the acceptable thresholds for good construct validity. Very limited testing occurred in relation to test-re-test reliability, responsiveness, acceptability, cross-cultural revalidation, convergent validity, discriminant validity and criterion validity. CONCLUSIONS: Seven scales may be sufficiently sound to be used with professionals, primarily with nurses. There is an absence of validation of leadership scales with regard to physicians. Given that physicians, along with nurses and allied health professionals have a leadership role in driving the implementation of evidence-based healthcare, this constitutes a clear gap in the psychometric testing of leadership scales for use in healthcare implementation research and practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (see Additional File 1) (PLoS Medicine. 6:e1000097, 2009) and the associated protocol has been registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (Registration Number CRD42019121544). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13012-021-01141-z. BioMed Central 2021-08-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8403357/ /pubmed/34454567 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01141-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Carlson, Melissa A. Morris, Sarah Day, Fiona Dadich, Ann Ryan, Annika Fradgley, Elizabeth A. Paul, Christine Psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review |
title | Psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review |
title_full | Psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review |
title_short | Psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review |
title_sort | psychometric properties of leadership scales for health professionals: a systematic review |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8403357/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34454567 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01141-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT carlsonmelissaa psychometricpropertiesofleadershipscalesforhealthprofessionalsasystematicreview AT morrissarah psychometricpropertiesofleadershipscalesforhealthprofessionalsasystematicreview AT dayfiona psychometricpropertiesofleadershipscalesforhealthprofessionalsasystematicreview AT dadichann psychometricpropertiesofleadershipscalesforhealthprofessionalsasystematicreview AT ryanannika psychometricpropertiesofleadershipscalesforhealthprofessionalsasystematicreview AT fradgleyelizabetha psychometricpropertiesofleadershipscalesforhealthprofessionalsasystematicreview AT paulchristine psychometricpropertiesofleadershipscalesforhealthprofessionalsasystematicreview |