Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23205039›Full record

ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2011

Interpersonal communication from the patient perspective: comparison of primary healthcare evaluation instruments.

Marie-Dominique Beaulieu, Jeannie L Haggerty, Christine Beaulieu, Fatima Bouharaoui, Jean-Frédéric Lévesque, Raynald Pineault, Frederick Burge, Darcy A Santor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Public Hospitals in China: Is There a Variation in Patient Experience with Inpatient Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Performance of an integrated network model: Evaluation of the first 4 years.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016
    Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Characteristics of primary care practices associated with high quality of care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2013
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Defining and measuring the patient-centered medical home.Journal of general internal medicine · 2010
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Marie-Dominique BeaulieuChaire Dr Sadok Besrour en médecine familiale, Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC.
Jeannie L Haggerty
Christine Beaulieu
Fatima Bouharaoui
Jean-Frédéric Lévesque
Raynald Pineault
Frederick Burge
Darcy A Santor

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThe operational definition of interpersonal communication is "the ability of the provider to elicit and understand patient concerns, to explain healthcare issues and to engage in shared decision-making if desired."

objectiveTo examine how well interpersonal communication is captured in validated instruments that evaluate primary healthcare from the patient's perspective.

method645 adults with at least one healthcare contact in the previous 12 months responded to instruments that evaluate primary healthcare. Eight subscales measure interpersonal communication: the Primary Care Assessment Survey (PCAS, two subscales); the Components of Primary Care Index (CPCI, one subscale); the first version of the EUROPEP (EUROPEP-I); and the Interpersonal Processes of Care Survey, version II (IPC-II, four subscales). Scores were normalized for descriptive comparison. Exploratory and confirmatory (structural equation) factor analysis examined fit to operational definition, and item response theory analysis examined item performance.

resultsItems not pertaining to interpersonal communication were removed from the EUROPEP-I. Most subscales are skewed positively. Normalized mean scores are similar across subscales except for IPC-II Patient-Centred Decision-Making and IPC-II Hurried Communication. All subscales load reasonably well on a single factor, presumed to be interpersonal communication. The best model has three underlying factors corresponding to eliciting (eigenvalue = 26.56), explaining (eigenvalue = 2.45) and decision-making (eigenvalue = 1.34). Both the PCAS Communication and the EUROPEP-I Clinical Behaviour subscales capture all three dimensions. Individual subscales within IPC-II measure each sub-dimension.

conclusionThe operational definition is well reflected in the available measures, although shared decision-making is poorly represented. These subscales can be used with confidence in the Canadian context to measure this crucial aspect of patient-centred care.

Identifiers

PMID23205039
PMCPMC3399440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.