Tue, Dec 2, 2025
[Archive]
Volume 18, Issue 4 (2025)
JMED 2025, 18(4): 0-0 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IAU.TNB.REC.1398.009
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Sedghi S, Sepehr F, Golestani A. Feasibility study and implementation of a questionnaire on the effectiveness of PhD curricula for knowledge management at medical universities in Iran. JMED 2025; 18 (4) : 2
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-2396-en.html
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-2396-en.html
1- Responsible Expert of the Library and Learning Center, Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Islamic Azad University of Tehran North Branch, Tehran, Iran ,fereshteh.sepehr@yahoo.com
3- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Islamic Azad University of Tehran North Branch, Tehran, Iran ,
3- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (455 Views)
Background & Objective: Checking the quality and dynamics of higher education curricula and checking the effectiveness of courses provide valuable feedback for improving educational standards. This study aimed to design and carry out a questionnaire to investigate and compare the effectiveness of PhD. curricula in encouraging knowledge management, as perceived by graduates of medical sciences universities in Iran.
Materials & Methods: A questionnaire based on the components of the Bukowitz and Williams knowledge management model was built, comprising 38 items. The Content Validity Index (CVI), Content Validity Ratio (CVR), and question clarity were checked. Internal consistency and reliability were confirmed using Cronbach's alpha and correlation coefficients. The finalized questionnaire was distributed to 221 PhD graduates in various fields of basic medical sciences from Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), and Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBUMS). Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Results: The questionnaire consisted of seven components, with a CVR of 0.72, CVI of 0.86, and clarity score of 0.82. The reliability of the questionnaire was strong, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.935, and a positive, significant correlation was seen among its components (p < 0.01). The mean scores for knowledge management in PhD courses, as rated by graduates, were similar across the three universities and above average. The highest mean scores were related to the "knowledge sharing" component (TUMS:3.2, IUMS:3.18, and SBUMS:3.14). The lowest mean scores were seen for the "learning from the knowledge process" component (IUMS:2.53, and SBUMS:2.65), and the "knowledge evaluation" component (TUMS:2.69).
Conclusion: The effectiveness of PhD curricula in encouraging knowledge management was rated above average by graduates of the investigated medical universities. However, the results highlight the need for greater stress on knowledge evaluation, knowledge elimination, and learning processes to improve the overall effectiveness of these programs.
Materials & Methods: A questionnaire based on the components of the Bukowitz and Williams knowledge management model was built, comprising 38 items. The Content Validity Index (CVI), Content Validity Ratio (CVR), and question clarity were checked. Internal consistency and reliability were confirmed using Cronbach's alpha and correlation coefficients. The finalized questionnaire was distributed to 221 PhD graduates in various fields of basic medical sciences from Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), and Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (SBUMS). Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Results: The questionnaire consisted of seven components, with a CVR of 0.72, CVI of 0.86, and clarity score of 0.82. The reliability of the questionnaire was strong, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.935, and a positive, significant correlation was seen among its components (p < 0.01). The mean scores for knowledge management in PhD courses, as rated by graduates, were similar across the three universities and above average. The highest mean scores were related to the "knowledge sharing" component (TUMS:3.2, IUMS:3.18, and SBUMS:3.14). The lowest mean scores were seen for the "learning from the knowledge process" component (IUMS:2.53, and SBUMS:2.65), and the "knowledge evaluation" component (TUMS:2.69).
Conclusion: The effectiveness of PhD curricula in encouraging knowledge management was rated above average by graduates of the investigated medical universities. However, the results highlight the need for greater stress on knowledge evaluation, knowledge elimination, and learning processes to improve the overall effectiveness of these programs.
Article number: 2
Article Type : Orginal Research |
Subject:
Medical Education
Received: 2025/01/21 | Accepted: 2025/09/30 | Published: 2025/11/19
Received: 2025/01/21 | Accepted: 2025/09/30 | Published: 2025/11/19
References
1. Tian J, Nakamori Y, Wierzbicki AP. Knowledge management and knowledge creation in academia: a study based on surveys in a Japanese research university. J Knowl Manag. 2009;13(2):76-92. [DOI:10.1108/13673270910942718]
2. Clarke AJ. Quality management practices and organizational knowledge management: a quantitative and qualitative investigation [dissertation]. Cincinnati (OH): Graduate College of :union: Institute & University; 2006.
3. Zins C. Conceptual approaches for defining data, information, and knowledge. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2007;58(4):479-93. [DOI:10.1002/asi.20508]
4. Kaba A, Ramaiah CK. Measuring knowledge acquisition and knowledge creation: a review of the literature. Lib Philos Pract. 2020;2020:4723.
5. Bose R. Knowledge management-enabled health care management systems: capabilities, infrastructure, and decision-support. Expert Syst Appl. 2003;24(1):59-71. [DOI:10.1016/S0957-4174(02)00083-0]
6. McCarthy AF. Knowledge management: evaluating strategies and processes used in higher education [dissertation]. Fort Lauderdale (FL): Nova Southeastern University; 2006.
7. Brooks F, Scott P. Knowledge work in nursing and midwifery: an evaluation through computer-mediated communication. Int J Nurs Stud. 2006;43(1):83-97. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2005.02.003] [PMID]
8. Aziz DT, Bouazza A, Jabur NH, Hassan DS, Al Aufi DA. Development and validation of a knowledge management questionnaire. J Inf Stud Technol. 2018;2018(1):1-16. [DOI:10.5339/jist.2018.2]
9. McElroy MW. The new knowledge management. 1st ed. London: Routledge; 2002.
10. Davoodi M, LotfiZadeh Z, Arab ZM. Knowledge management and its influencing factors in Ahvaz Jundishapur university of medical sciences. J JundiShapur Educ Dev. 2018;7(2):120-8.
11. Alamri MZ, Jhanjhi NZ, Humayun M. Digital curriculum importance for new era education. In: Jhanjhi NZ, editor. Employing recent technologies for improved digital governance. Hershey (PA): IGI Global; 2020. p. 1-18. [DOI:10.4018/978-1-7998-1851-9.ch001]
12. Haav K. Implementation of curriculum theory in formation of specialists in higher education. In: Cai Y, editor. Sustainable futures for higher education. Singapore: Springer; 2018. p. 305-9. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-96035-7_25]
13. Ngugi J, Goosen L. Modelling course-design characteristics, self-regulated learning and the mediating effect of knowledge-sharing behavior as drivers of individual innovative behavior. EURASIA J Math Sci Technol Educ. 2018;14(8):em1575. [DOI:10.29333/ejmste/92087]
14. Sánchez LE, André P. Knowledge management in environmental impact assessment agencies: a study in Québec, Canada. J Environ Assess Policy Manag. 2013;15(3):1350015. [DOI:10.1142/S1464333213500154]
15. Fathi VK, Khosravi BA, Hajatmand F. Evaluating internal quality of educational programs of PhD medical ethics curriculum from point of professors and students. Med Ethics. 2014;8(27):129-62.
16. Aharony N. Librarians' attitudes toward knowledge management. Coll Res Libr. 2011;72(2):111-26. [DOI:10.5860/crl-87]
17. Bukowitz WR, Williams RL. The Knowledge Management Fieldbook. London: Financial Times Prentice Hall; 1999.
18. Wilson FR, Pan W, Schumsky DA. Recalculation of the critical values for Lawshe's content validity ratio. Meas Eval Couns Dev. 2012;45(3):197-210. [DOI:10.1177/0748175612440286]
19. Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2007;30(4):459-67. [DOI:10.1002/nur.20199] [PMID]
20. Rubio DM, Berg-Weger M, Tebb SS, Lee ES, Rauch S. Objectifying content validity: conducting a content validity study in social work research. Soc Work Res. 2003;27(2):94-104. [DOI:10.1093/swr/27.2.94]
21. Schutz AL, Counte MA, Meurer S. Development of a patient safety culture measurement tool for ambulatory health care settings: analysis of content validity. Health Care Manag Sci. 2007;10(2):139-49. [DOI:10.1007/s10729-007-9014-y] [PMID]
22. DeVellis RF, Thorpe CT. Scale development: theory and applications. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications; 2021.
23. Karamitri I, Kitsios F, Talias MA. Development and validation of a knowledge management questionnaire for hospitals and other healthcare organizations. Sustainability. 2020;12(7):2730. [DOI:10.3390/su12072730]
24. Akhavan P, Hosnavi R, Sanjaghi ME. Identification of knowledge management critical success factors in Iranian academic research centers. Educ Bus Soc Contemp Middle East Issues. 2009;2(4):276-88. [DOI:10.1108/17537980911001107]
25. Wang Z, Wang N. Knowledge sharing, innovation and firm performance. Expert Syst Appl. 2012;39(10):8899-908. [DOI:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.017]
26. Kim MJ, Lee H, Kim HK, et al. Quality of faculty, students, curriculum and resources for nursing doctoral education in Korea: a focus group study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(3):295-306. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.07.005] [PMID]
27. Charles W, Nawe J. Knowledge management (KM) practices in institutions of higher learning in Tanzania with reference to Mbeya university of science and technology. Univ Dar Salaam Lib J. 2017;12(1):48-65.
28. Asadi S, Mahmoudi M. Survey of the relationship of knowledge management and organizational creativity and innovation among the employees of Tehran university of medical sciences. J Hosp. 2018;17(1):97-108.
29. Vali L, Izadi A, Jahani Y, Okhovati M. Investigating knowledge management status among faculty members of Kerman university of medical sciences based on the Nonaka model in 2015. Electron Physician. 2016;8(8):2738-44. [DOI:10.19082/2738] [PMID] []
30. Alhammad F, Al Faori S, Abu Husan LS. Knowledge sharing in the Jordanian universities. J Knowl Manag Pract. 2009;10(3):1-9.
31. Fullwood R, Rowley J, Delbridge R. Knowledge sharing amongst academics in UK universities. J Knowl Manag. 2013;17(1):123-36. [DOI:10.1108/13673271311300831]
32. Cabrera EF, Cabrera A. Fostering knowledge sharing through people management practices. Int J Hum Resour Manag. 2005;16(5):720-35. [DOI:10.1080/09585190500083020]
33. Kanzler S, Niedergassel B, Leker J. Knowledge sharing in academic R&D collaborations: does culture matter? J Chin Entrep. 2012;4(1):42-59. [DOI:10.1108/17561391211200902]
34. Mirghafoori SH, Nejad F, Sadeghi Arani Z. Performance evaluation of Yazd's health sector on applying knowledge management process. J Health Adm. 2010;13(39):79-88.
35. Mohammadi Ostani M, Shojafard A. A feasibility implementation of Bukowitz & William's knowledge management model and its impact on knowledge contribution in Qom province public libraries. Digit Smart Libr Res. 2019;6(3):59-68.
36. Boud D, Falchikov N. Aligning assessment with long‐term learning. Assess Eval High Educ. 2006;31(4):399-413. [DOI:10.1080/02602930600679050]
37. Hmelo-Silver CE. Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev. 2004;16(3):235-66. [DOI:10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3]
38. Mann K, Gordon J, MacLeod A. Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: a systematic review. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2009;14(4):595-621. [DOI:10.1007/s10459-007-9090-2] [PMID]
39. Epstein RM. Assessment in medical education. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(4):387-96. [DOI:10.1056/NEJMra054784] [PMID]
40. Tessema MT, Ready K, Yu W. Factors affecting college students' satisfaction with major curriculum: evidence from nine years of data. Int J Humanit Soc Sci. 2012;2(2):34-44.
41. Kuh GD. Assessing conditions to enhance educational effectiveness: the inventory for student engagement and success. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 2005.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
