ArticlePloS one2016
Construct Validity of the Dutch Version of the 12-Item Partners in Health Scale: Measuring Patient Self-Management Behaviour and Knowledge in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.
Article in PloS one, 2016. 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 18 papers.
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.
Self-management Support After Burns: Study Protocol for a Multicenter Stepped-wedge Hybrid Type 2 Effectiveness-implementation Study
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-Management Support After Burns: Protocol for a Multicenter, Stepped-Wedge Hybrid Type II Effectiveness-Implementation Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Partners in Health Scale: Chronic Disease Self-Management in Primary Healthcare.International journal of nursing practice · 2025Article
- Validation of Psychometric Properties of Partners in Health Scale for Heart Failure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Evaluation of a Collaborative Care Program for Patients With Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia: Protocol for a Multiple Case Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Development and validation of self-management scale for tuberculosis patients.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Comparing Survivors of Cancer in Population-Based Samples With Those in Online Cancer Communities: Cross-sectional Questionnaire Study.JMIR cancer · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of a Mobile Health and Self-Management App for High-Risk Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Daily Clinical Practice: Mixed Methods Evaluation Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Article
- Article
- The Interactive Web-Based Program MSmonitor for Self-Management and Multidisciplinary Care in Persons With Multiple Sclerosis: Quasi-Experimental Study of Short-Term Effects on Patient Empowerment.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- A Psychometric Evaluation of theAssessment · 2020Article
- Identifying subgroups of persons with multimorbidity based on their needs for care and support.BMC family practice · 2019Article
- Evaluating the feasibility of a nurse-led self-management support intervention for kidney transplant recipients: a pilot study.BMC nephrology · 2019Article
- The structural and convergent validity of three commonly used measures of self-management in persons with neurological conditions.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019Article
- The French adaptation and validation of the Partners in Health (PIH) scale among patients with chronic conditions seen in primary care.PloS one · 2019Article
- Item response theory evaluation of the biomedical scale of the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale.PloS one · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe 12-item Partners in Health scale (PIH) was developed in Australia to measure self-management behaviour and knowledge in patients with chronic diseases, and has undergone several changes. Our aim was to assess the construct validity and reliability of the latest PIH version in Dutch COPD patients.
methodsThe 12 items of the PIH, scored on a self-rated 9-point Likert scale, are used to calculate total and subscale scores (knowledge; coping; recognition and management of symptoms; and adherence to treatment). We used forward-backward translation of the latest version of the Australian PIH to define a Dutch PIH (PIH(Du)). Mokken Scale Analysis and common Factor Analysis were performed on data from a Dutch COPD sample to investigate the psychometric properties of the Dutch PIH; and to determine whether the four-subscale solution previously found for the original Australian PIH could be replicated for the Dutch PIH.
resultsTwo subscales were found for the Dutch PIH data (n = 118); 1) knowledge and coping; 2) recognition and management of symptoms, adherence to treatment. The correlation between the two Dutch subscales was 0.43. The lower-bound of the reliability of the total scale equalled 0.84. Factor analysis indicated that the first two factors explained a larger percentage of common variance (39.4% and 19.9%) than could be expected when using random data (17.5% and 15.1%).
conclusionWe recommend using two PIH subscale scores when assessing self-management in Dutch COPD patients. Our results did not support the four-subscale structure as previously reported for the original Australian PIH.
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.