Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27216940›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2017

Validation study of a Chinese version of Partners in Health in Hong Kong (C-PIH HK).

Teresa Mei Lee Chiu, Katharine Tai Wo Tam, Choi Fong Siu, Phyllis Wai Ping Chau, Malcolm Battersby

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06782126 (Self-management Support After Burns), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT06782126 active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Self-management Support After Burns: Study Protocol for a Multicenter Stepped-wedge Hybrid Type 2 Effectiveness-implementation Study

TypeobservationalSponsorMartini Hospital GroningenRan2024 to 2026Enrolled146ConditionsBurnsArmsBreeZe (Brandwonden en Zelfmanagement)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Teresa Mei Lee ChiuIndependent Researcher, Hong Kong, China. tchiu@space4teams.com.
Katharine Tai Wo TamHaven of Hope Hospital, Hong Kong, China.
Choi Fong SiuHong Kong Society for Rehabilitation, Hong Kong, China.
Phyllis Wai Ping ChauHong Kong Society for Rehabilitation, Hong Kong, China.
Malcolm BattersbyFlinders University, Adelaide, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Partners in Health (PIH) scale is a measure designed to assess the generic knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and impacts of self-management. A cross-cultural adaptation of the PIH for use in Hong Kong was evaluated in this study. This paper reports the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of PIH (C-PIH[HK]).

methodA 12-item PIH was translated using forward-backward translation technique and reviewed by individuals with chronic diseases and health professionals. A total of 209 individuals with chronic diseases completed the scale. The construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability were evaluated in two waves.

resultsThe findings in Wave 1 (n = 73) provided acceptable psychometric properties of the C-PIH(HK) but supported the adaptation of question 5 to improve the cultural relevance, validity, and reliability of the scale. An adapted version of C-PIH(HK) was evaluated in Wave 2. The findings in Wave 2 (n = 136) demonstrated good construct validity and internal consistency of C-PIH(HK). A principal component analysis with Oblimin rotation yielded a 3-factor solution, and the Cronbach's alphas of the subscales ranged from 0.773 to 0.845. Participants were asked whether they perceived the self-management workshops they attended and education provided by health professionals as useful or not. The results showed that the C-PIH(HK) was able to discriminate those who agreed and those who disagreed related to the usefulness of individual health education (p < 0.0001 in all subscales) and workshops (p < 0.001 in the knowledge subscale) as hypothesized. The test-retest reliability was high (ICC = 0.818).

conclusionA culturally adapted version of PIH for use in Hong Kong was evaluated. The study supported good construct validity, discriminate validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability of the C-PIH(HK).

Indexed as

Asian PeopleChronic DiseaseFemaleHong KongHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsSelf CareTranslationsChineseChronic conditionCultural adaptationScale validationSelf-management

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.