ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2015
The use of cognitive interviews to revise the Quality of Trauma Care Patient-Reported Experience Measure (QTAC-PREM).
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of the validity and reliability of patient-reported experience measures.Health services research · 2019Pooled it
- Development of the Canadian food intake screener for adolescents based on Canada's Food Guide 2019 healthy eating recommendations.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025Article
- Understanding data visualization techniques in qualitative studies used to develop and validate patient-reported outcome measures: a targeted literature review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- The Use of an Iterative Strategy of Cognitive Interview and Expert Consultation to Revise the Quality of Life Scale for Patients with Aplastic Anemia (QLS-AA).Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
- Validity Evidence of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ) Part 2: Mixed Methods Approach to Evaluate Test Content, Response Process, and Internal Structure in the Australian Community Health Setting.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Investigating implementation of school health policies through a health equity lens: A measures development study protocol.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Short form version of the Quality of Trauma Care Patient-Reported Experience Measure (SF QTAC-PREM).BMC research notes · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe "Quality of Trauma Care Patient-Reported Experience Measure" is the first measure of patient experiences with overall injury care. The objective of this study was to use cognitive interviews to inform revision of the measure into a parsimonious set of items that function as intended, in preparation for multicenter testing.
methodsConcurrent and retrospective cognitive interviews with injured patients (n = 17) and family members (n = 13) using semi-structured interview guides. Responses were analyzed using thematic analysis.
resultsSix broad themes were identified and guided revisions: (1) participants did not have the information to answer items (n = 9); (2) items were ambiguous or were inconsistently interpreted (n = 13); (3) items did not measure the intended constructs (n = 6); (4) items included assumptions about healthcare processes (n = 4); (5) items measured non-priority aspects of injury care (n = 8); and (6) items were redundant (n = 5). Two issues resulted in key conceptual and content changes: participants' difficulty to evaluate pre-hospital, emergency department, and intensive care unit services due to recall issues and the challenge to evaluate the effectiveness and equity of care. In total, 39 items were deleted, 28 new items developed, and the final instrument included 63 items.
conclusionsOur results informed changes to item content, format, and response options. This study highlights key issues to consider when incorporating patient/family perspectives into quality measurement, most notably, that few participants can assess the quality of care in the pre-hospital and emergency department phases of care and that novel methods are needed to evaluate the effectiveness and equity of care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25589232What 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.