ArticleHealth services research2011
Examining multiple sources of differential item functioning on the Clinician & Group CAHPS® survey.
Article in Health services research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of integrating medical assistants and community health workers on diabetes care management in community health centers.BMC health services research · 2018Trial
- Associations Between Contraceptive Counseling Quality and Contraceptive Use in a National Survey of Women Veterans.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2025Article
- Organizational Health Literacy and Health Among New York State Medicaid Members.Health literacy research and practice · 2023Article
- Provider discussion of health goals and psychosocial needs: Comparing older to younger veteran experience.Health services research · 2023Article
- Perceived Contraceptive Counseling Quality Among Veterans Using VA Primary Care: Data from the ECUUN Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluations of the sum-score-based and item response theory-based tests of group mean differences under various simulation conditions.Statistical methods in medical research · 2021Article
- The Relationship Between Primary Care Physician Burnout and Patient-Reported Care Experiences: a Cross-sectional Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Observational
- Rating Communication in GP Consultations: The Association Between Ratings Made by Patients and Trained Clinical Raters.Medical care research and review : MCRR · 2018Article
- Disparities in Diabetes Care Quality by English Language Preference in Community Health Centers.Health services research · 2018Article
- Measurement equivalence of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPSQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate psychometric properties of a widely used patient experience survey. DATA SOURCES: English-language responses to the Clinician & Group Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS®) survey (n = 12,244) from a 2008 quality improvement initiative involving eight southern California medical groups.
methodsWe used an iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory differential item functioning (DIF) algorithm to identify items with DIF related to patient sociodemographic characteristics, duration of the physician-patient relationship, number of physician visits, and self-rated physical and mental health. We accounted for all sources of DIF and determined its cumulative impact. PRINCIPAL
findingsThe upper end of the CG-CAHPS® performance range is measured with low precision. With sensitive settings, some items were found to have DIF. However, overall DIF impact was negligible, as 0.14 percent of participants had salient DIF impact. Latinos who spoke predominantly English at home had the highest prevalence of salient DIF impact at 0.26 percent.
conclusionsThe CG-CAHPS® functions similarly across commercially insured respondents from diverse backgrounds. Consequently, previously documented racial and ethnic group differences likely reflect true differences rather than measurement bias. The impact of low precision at the upper end of the scale should be clarified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.