United Kingdom, Australia, the United States have established a complete set of applicable teacher quality standards system, teacher access, training process and assessment are strict, while career development and support systems are perfect. There are specialized non-profit organizations that are responsible for the following tasks, developing unified teaching materials, regularly organizing training sessions for general practice (family medicine) faculty, conducting unified assessments and issuing certificates to those who pass the exams, establishing training and assessment systems for faculty members, as well as core indicators for the standardized and systematic construction, evaluating both resident physicians and faculty members based on these indicators. At present, this evaluation system has not yet been established in China.

To construct the model for evaluating the quality of teachers in general practice in standardized clinical residency training bases (general hospitals) based on Delphi method and chromatography analysis.

From June 2022 to August 2023, a research team of 10 researchers was formed. Various materials were included through literature search, and evaluation indicators and standards were extracted. Through thematic group discussions, in-depth analysis of evaluation indicators was conducted and specific indicators and standards were extracted. The comprehensive results were formed into a Delphi expert consultation questionnaire (the first round) . Then select 39 experts from various regions across the country and invite them to participate in 2 or 3 rounds of Delphi expert consultation through questionnaires distributed via email or WeChat. Conduct indicator screening, weight design, and evaluation standard modification on the preliminarily designed evaluation system. An objective assessment should be made regarding the importance of each indicator. The indicators at various levels should be screened step by step, and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) should be applied to determine the weight of each indicator.

After three rounds of expert consultation, a three-level indicator evaluation model was constructed, including 5 first level indicators (teaching conditions, teaching literacy, medical ability, teaching ability, research ability) , 18 second level indicators, 49 third level indicators, and their evaluation standards. The weights of each level of indicator were analyzed and determined. The effective recovery rates of the three rounds of consultation questionnaires were 96.66%, 96.66%, and 100.00%, respectively. The expert authority coefficient was 0.85. The basis for expert judgment was 0.952 3, and the familiarity of experts was 0.910 3. The expert authority coefficient was 0.93. In the first round of consultation, the expert coordination coefficient was 0.21, with a coordination test P<0.05. In the second round of consultation, the expert coordination coefficient was 0.16, with a coordination test P<0.05. In the third round of consultation, the expert coordination coefficient was 0.82, with a coordination test P<0.05. The weights of the first-level indicators were 0.05, 0.25, 0.25, 0.40, and 0.05, respectively.

This study provides methods, processes, and experiences for the development and improvement of standardized clinical residency training bases (general hospitals) general practice faculty quality evaluation system. Preliminary establishment of the quality evaluation index system of general practice faculty with teaching ability as the focus.

在英国、澳大利亚、美国等发达国家具备完整适用的全科医学师资质量评价体系及完善的职业发展和支撑体系，设有专门的非营利机构，负责统一教材，定期组织全科医学师资培训，并组织统一考核，对合格者颁发证书，建立各自的师资培训、考核评价制度及规范化、系统化建设的核心指标，对住院医师和师资进行评价。目前我国尚未建立此评价指标体系。

在应用德尔菲法及层次分析法的基础上构建临床住培基地（综合医院）全科医学师资质量评价指标体系。

2022年6月—2023年8月，由10名研究者组成课题小组，通过系统综述的方法，对研究资料进行分析、总结，并从资料中提炼出全科医学师资质量评价的指标和标准，通过小组讨论对评价指标和标准进行逐个、严格评价和分析，并总结出具体指标和标准，最终形成第一轮专家咨询问卷，而后向选取的39名专家发放电子问卷进行三轮咨询，就指标的重要性给出客观评估，逐步对各级指标进行筛选，并运用层次分析法确定每个指标的权重。

经过3轮专家咨询，构建了包含5个一级指标（教学条件、教学素养、医疗能力、教学能力、研究能力）、18个二级指标、49个三级指标及其评价标准的三级评价指标体系，三轮咨询问卷有效回收率分别为96.66%、96.66%、100.00%，专家权威系数为0.85，专家判断依据为0.952 3，专家熟悉程度为0.910 3，专家权威系数为0.93。第一轮咨询，专家协调系数0.21，协调性检验P<0.05；第二轮咨询，专家协调系数0.16，协调性检验P<0.05；第三轮咨询，专家协调系数为0.82，协调性检验P<0.05。一级指标的权重分别为0.05、0.25、0.25、0.40、0.05。

本研究通过展现临床住培基地（综合医院）全科医学师资质量评价体系的方法、过程，初步构建了以教学能力为评价重点的全科医学师资质量评价指标体系。