ArticleAtencion primaria2013
[Reliability of a questionnaire used in the long-term follow up of the opinion and perceptions of family medicine by medical students of the University of Zaragoza (Spain)].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Five Years Of Family Medicine Undergraduate Education In Ghana: A Wake-Up Call!Ghana medical journal · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimFamily medicine deals with certain aspects and perspectives that are often left behind in the training of other levels of care, thus the need for medical students to make contact with Primary Care is of increasing importance. The aim of this study is to evaluate the reliability of the questionnaire of the UNIMEDIFAM group (FIS PI070975) for the long-term outcome of expectations and knowledge about family medicine.
designReliability of a questionnaire.
settingUniversity of Zaragoza.
participants371 students from the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 6th years.
methodThe internal consistency of the questionnaire was determined using Cronbach's alpha coefficient, and the stability using the test-retest.
resultsOn scale A of the questionnaire we found that three of 19 items were unstable, in 8 of 26 on scale B, and 3 of 38 items on scale C. The Cronbach's alpha value of scale A was 0.722, 0.861 on scale B, and 0,663 on scale C.
conclusionsThe 3 scales are within the appropriate values, except scale C, which is very close. The findings of this validation process can serve as a reference that may be extrapolated to the UNIMEDIFAM national questionnaire.
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.