Empirical evidence on the design and application of an intelligent assessment system for humanistic literacy in nursing

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Index weight and sort

Primary indicator	Secondary indicator	Combination number
Knowledge of medical humanities(0.295)	Humanistic education(0.466)	0.155
	Humanistic morality(0.534)	0.14
Humanistic concept of medicine(0.270)	Humanistic identity(0.576)	0.158
	Humanistic consciousness(0.424)	0.112
Humanistic spirit(0.173)	Humanistic care(0.140)	0.04
	Values(0.642)	0.102
	Humanistic emotion(0.218)	0.031
Medical humanities application(0.262)	Expressive power(0.261)	0.065
	Expressive power(0.739)	0.197

Anova and friedman test the results

	Sum of squares	df	Mean square	Friedman Card square	Sig
Intergroup	124.353	5	34.054	0.501	0.757
Within group	673.174	12	64.164
Within group		16
Levene statistic	2.672		Sig.	0.097
Friedman’s card	9.1		Sig.	0.017
The harmony coefficient of Kendall			0.851

Fuzzy reasoning model evaluation results

School number	Name	Appraisal index	Score	Comprehensive evaluation score
100660120	WAB	Knowledge of medical humanities	79.18	83.51
		Humanistic concept of medicine	77.62
		Humanistic spirit	81.81
		Medical humanities application	80.02
100660104	WMR	Knowledge of medical humanities	67.4	69.34
		Humanistic concept of medicine	63.62
		Humanistic spirit	64.75
		Medical humanities application	66.33
100660105	WQW	Knowledge of medical humanities	61.1	66.42
		Humanistic concept of medicine	60.11
		Humanistic spirit	63.38
		Medical humanities application	65.02
100660121	WYY	Knowledge of medical humanities	74.9	79.35
		Humanistic concept of medicine	73.69
		Humanistic spirit	77.67
		Medical humanities application	78.99
100660125	LWE	Knowledge of medical humanities	76.41	81.34
		Humanistic concept of medicine	75.24
		Humanistic spirit	77.69
		Medical humanities application	79.11
100660106	SYY	Knowledge of medical humanities	76.66	82.65
		Humanistic concept of medicine	75.42
		Humanistic spirit	79.5
		Medical humanities application	81.21
100660107	XWJ	Knowledge of medical humanities	64.6	69.77
		Humanistic concept of medicine	63.55
		Humanistic spirit	67
		Medical humanities application	66.24
100660124	YGY	Knowledge of medical humanities	89.56	94.26
		Humanistic concept of medicine	88.12
		Humanistic spirit	92.86
		Medical humanities application	89.01
100660108	YYJ	Knowledge of medical humanities	63	68.56
		Humanistic concept of medicine	61.81
		Humanistic spirit	64.94
		Medical humanities application	65.89
100660126	ZQW	Knowledge of medical humanities	61.77	65.34
		Humanistic concept of medicine	51.35
		Humanistic spirit	68.8
		Medical humanities application	69.98

Humanistic literacy evaluation index system

Primary indicator	Secondary indicator
Knowledge of medical humanities	Education (B1)
	Humanistic morality (B2)
Humanistic concept of medicine	Human identity (B3)
	Human awareness (B4)
Humanistic spirit	Humanistic care (B5)
	Values (B6)
	Human feelings (B7)
Medical humanities application	Express ability (B8)
	Innovative ability (B9)

The results of the teaching index are calculated

Experts	Score
	Sample 1	Sample 2	Sample 3
A	98.73	85.73	83.55
B	91.46	83.4	85.84
C	97.44	88.61	83.44
D	96.35	88.22	77.93
E	93.73	85.91	65.85
Mean value	95.54	86.37	79.32

The calculation of the content validity index of the index model

Entry	The number of experts rated 3 or 4	I-CVI	Evaluation
B1	5	1.00	Excellence
B2	4	0.90	Excellence
B3	5	1.00	Excellence
B4	5	1.00	Excellence
B5	4	1.00	Excellence
B6	5	0.90	Excellence
B7	5	1.00	Excellence
B8	5	1.00	Excellence
B9	5	1.00	Excellence

Evaluate the overall results of the model content validity

Expert number	The number of experts rated 3 or 4	Item quantity	I-CVI	PC	K*	Evaluation
5	5	9	1.00	0.071	1.000	Excellence
	4	3	0.90	0.164	0.784	Excellence

Survey questionnaire structure table

Module	Questionnaire index	Issue number
Part one	The interface design of the measurement system	Q1
	The operation process of the measurement system	Q2
	The convenience of the measurement system	Q3
	The size of the measurement system	Q4
	Navigation of the measurement system	Q5
Second part	Evaluation result	Q6
	Test mode	Q7
	Evaluation feedback content	Q8

Evaluation of the I-CVI values of different experts

Expert number	The number of experts rated 3 or 4	I-CVI	PC	K*	Evaluation
3	3	1.00	0.135	1.00	Excellence
3	3	0.72	0.112	0.51	Excellence
4	5	1.00	0.064	1.00	Excellence
4	4	0.82	0.31	0.71	Good
5	4	1.00	0.045	1.00	Excellence
5	5	0.68	0.374	0.81	General

The results of the test of the measurement system

Module	Item	Very agree	Agree	Total ratio	Mean
The first part of the system itself	Q1	34.7%	58.3%	93%	4.212
	Q2	48%	48.3%	96.3%	4.534
	Q3	39.2%	54.3%	93.5%	4.235
	Q4	53.5%	44%	97.5%	4.521
	Q5	48.4%	45.6%	94%	4.442
The second part of the assessment	Q6	47%	45.6%	92.6%	4.345
	Q7	54.3%	44%	98.3%	4.524
	Q8	67%	31.5%	98.5%	4.576