ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2015
Physician Enabling Skills Questionnaire: Validation of a newly developed instrument in primary health care.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06608589 (CONSTELLATIONS Living Lab), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
CONSTELLATIONS Living Lab: Development, Implementation and Evaluation of a Patient-oriented Quality Improvement Program Targeting Care Transitions of Older Adults Living with Major Neurocognitive Disorders and Their Caregivers.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- [Questionnaires of person centered care in primary care. A systematic review].Atencion primaria · 2020Pooled it
- Kindness: Definitions and a pilot study for the development of a kindness scale in healthcare.PloS one · 2023Article
- Reorganizing Pharmaceutical Care in Family Medicine Groups for Older Adults With or at Risk of Major Neurocognitive Disorders: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- The revised Patient Perception of Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire: Exploring the factor structure in French-speaking patients with multimorbidity.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the reliability and validity of the newly developed Physician Enabling Skills Questionnaire (PESQ) by assessing its internal consistency, test-retest reliability, concurrent validity with patient-centred care, and predictive validity with patient activation and patient enablement.
designValidation study.
settingSaguenay, Que.
participantsOne hundred patients with at least 1 chronic disease who presented in a waiting room of a regional health centre family medicine unit.
main outcome measuresFamily physicians' enabling skills, measured with the PESQ at 2 points in time (ie, while in the waiting room at the family medicine unit and 2 weeks later through a mail survey); patient-centred care, assessed with the Patient Perception of Patient-Centredness instrument; patient activation, assessed with the Patient Activation Measure; and patient enablement, assessed with the Patient Enablement Instrument.
resultsThe internal consistency of the 6 subscales of the PESQ was adequate (Cronbach α = .69 to .92). The test-retest reliability was very good (r = 0.90; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.93). Concurrent validity with the Patient Perception of Patient-Centredness instrument was good (r = -0.67; 95% CI -0.78 to -0.53; P < .001). The PESQ accounts for 11% of the total variance with the Patient Activation Measure (r² = 0.11; P = .002) and 19% of the variance with the Patient Enablement Instrument (r² = 0.19; P < .001).
conclusionThe newly developed PESQ presents good psychometric properties, allowing for its use in practice and research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26889507PMC4642923What 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.