AzTrials
AzTrials

Peer GroupNCT04547517

Psychometric Evaluation of the Traditional Chinese Version of CCS-R Practicum Evaluation

An observational study of Peer Group, run by The University of Hong Kong at 1 site in China.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This study aims to translate the original Counselor Competencies Scale-Revised (CCS-R, English version) into traditional Chinese. It will then test the psychometric properties of the newly translated CCS-R to examine its factorial structure using both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and CFA. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 35 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Peer Group
What is being tested?
Evaluation of Counselling competencies
How many people
208 participants
Where
1 siteChina
Study dates
15 Sep 2020to 5 Nov 2020
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 35 years
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult

Study population: Young people in Hong Kong who complete the training of peer counselling for smoking cessation or anti-drug abusing will be selected and invited to participate in the proposed study

Who may be able to join

  • Aged 18-35.
  • Completing the training of peer counselling for smoking cessation or anti-drug abusing
  • Be able to speak Cantonese and read traditional Chinese.

Who cannot join

  • Those who do not provide written consent.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

China1 site
  • The University of Hong Kong

    Hong Kong

Other trials in China

About this study

Official title: Psychometric Evaluation of the Traditional Chinese Version of CCS-R Practicum Evaluation and the Assessment of the Counselling Competencies Among Young Peer Counsellors in Hong Kong

This study aims to translate the original Counselor Competencies Scale-Revised (CCS-R, English version) into traditional Chinese. It will then test the psychometric properties of the newly translated CCS-R to examine its factorial structure using both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and CFA.

Read the detailed description

Clinical supervisors are charged with facilitating the development of their supervisees toward becoming ethical and competent. In addition, clinical supervisors are expected to serve as gatekeepers for the profession and deny entry to students who demonstrate a deficiency of necessary competencies. Despite the developmental and remedial expectations for clinical supervisors, specific guidelines to direct clinical supervisors' evaluation of their supervisees' level of counseling competencies are limited. The lack of agreed-upon and standardized evaluation criteria for supervisees' minimum level of counseling competencies and the limited availability of tested assessments to measure supervisees' counseling competencies fosters subjectivity in supervisory assessment and potential remediation. Therefore, additional research is warranted relating to clinical supervisory evaluation instruments.

Supervisory evaluation is "the nucleus of clinical supervision". Specifically, "supervisors document and provide supervisees with ongoing feedback regarding their performance and schedule periodic formal evaluative sessions throughout the supervisory relationship". However, clinical supervisors are often uncomfortable in evaluating their supervisees. Nevertheless, effective and ethical supervision supports supervisees' development of counseling competencies in which supervisors provide their supervisees with both formative and summative evaluative feedback within the context of a strong supervisory alliance. Limited research was identified investigating supervisory evaluation processes with standardized assessment tools such as the counselling competencies in Hong Kong.

An initial quantitative investigation of the 23-item counselling competencies scale-revised (CCS-R) supported the construct validity (e.g., exploratory factor analysis identified a five-factor model [professional behaviors, professional behaviors, counseling skills, assessment and application, and professional dispositions], accounting for 72.61% of the variance), internal consistency reliability, interrater reliability (r ¼.570), and criterion-related validity (correlation between supervisees' practicum course grade and final CCS score, r ¼.407,) of the instrument. The researchers concluded that "the CCS is a promising instrument for assessment in counselor education and supervision". Nevertheless, qualitative data are warranted to evaluate the CCS with a sample of clinical supervisors and their supervisees around its (a) functionality in communication of supervisory feedback with the CCS, (b) consistency in CCS evaluation, and (c) emotional reactions to supervisory evaluation with the CCS. Therefore, this study aims to translate the original Counselor Competencies Scale-Revised (CCS-R, English version) into traditional Chinese. It will then test the psychometric properties of the newly translated CCS-R to examine its factorial structure using both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and CFA.

Conditions
Peer Group
Being tested
Evaluation of Counselling competencies

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Evaluation of Counselling competenciesOther

    To complete a set of questionnaires

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Counselling Competencies

    The counselling competencies scale-revised is a 23-item scale measuring Counselor Competencies. It includes two factors, which are counselling skills \& therapeutic conditions with 12 items, and counselling dispositions \&behaviors with 11 items. Each of the items has a range of 1-5 points (0 indicates poor performance, while 5 indicates performance exceeding expectations). The 12 and 11 components scores are summed to yield two scores, with a range of 12-60 points and 11-55 points respectively.

    Measured: Baseline

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Counselling performance assessment scores

    Validated Counselling performance assessment Sheet

    Measured: Baseline

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted14 Sep 2020
  2. Study start15 Sep 2020
  3. Primary completion20 Sep 2020
  4. Study completion5 Nov 2020

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Enrolment
208 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04547517
Sponsor's protocol ID
CCS-R
Status last verified
Sep 2020
First submitted
7 Sep 2020
Last updated
9 Nov 2020
Results posted
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Yes: The relevant anonymized patient-level data, full dataset, technical appendix, and statistical code are available on reasonable request. The approval from the Principal Investigator for the purpose of data use is required.

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Peer Group, run by The University of Hong Kong at 1 site in China.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Nov 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in China. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Counselling Competencies (time frame: Baseline). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Nov 2020; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in