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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
- First posted14 Sep 2020
- Study start15 Sep 2020
- Primary completion20 Sep 2020
- Study completion5 Nov 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Peer GroupStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by The University of Hong KongThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- The University of Hong Kong
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
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.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Nov 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- 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
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04547517
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CCS-R
- Conditions
- Peer Group
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 208 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- The University of Hong KongUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 20 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 5 Nov 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 14 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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.
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.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Cross-sectional
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 35 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- 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
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- 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.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Those who do not provide written consent.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Evaluation of Counselling competenciesTo complete a set of questionnaires | Other | – |
Primary outcome
Counselling Competencies
Time frame: Baseline
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.
1 secondary outcome
Counselling performance assessment scores
Time frame: Baseline
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Nov 2020.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: 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.
Related trials for Peer Group
Recruiting
Enhanced Mentor Mother Strategy for Pregnant and Postpartum Women Living With HIV
Hiv, Transmission Vertical
Active, not recruiting
Effects of a Nurse-Led Self-Compassion and Kindness Program on Compassion and Healthy Peer Relationships in Adolescents
Self Compassion, Compassion
Active, not recruiting
Effects of a Lay-led Anxiety and Depression Self-management Program for Cancer Patients
Neoplasms, Anxiety
Recruiting
The Effect of a Peer Mentoring Program on Nursing Students
Peer Group, Mentoring
Enrolling by invitation
The Effect of Peer Mentoring Model Supported by Mobile Application
Peer Group Guidance, Academic Achievements
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
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.