Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27746917›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal for person centered healthcare2016

Patient Experience in an Era of Primary Care Transformation: Revisiting the PACIC.

Polly Hitchcock Noël, Salene Jones, Michael L Parchman

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal for person centered healthcare, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06922188 (Development of Measures to Screen for Financial Hardship in Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia), 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.

NCT06922188 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Development of Measures to Screen for Financial Hardship in Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia

TypeobservationalSponsorFred Hutchinson Cancer CenterRan2025 to 2029Enrolled2,460ConditionsFinancial Hardship, Alzheimer&#39, s Disease (AD), Alzheimer&#39
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  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

3 authors.

Polly Hitchcock NoëlUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, South Texas Veterans Health Care System, 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX 78229, 210-394-0360.
Salene JonesMacColl Center for Healthcare Innovation, Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101 206-287-2704.
Michael L ParchmanMacColl Center for Healthcare Innovation, Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, 1730 Minor Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, 206-287-2704.

Funding

Improving Risk Factors for Diabetes Complications in Primary CareR18DK075692 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI NOEL, POLLY H · 2007 to 2011
$2.5M
NIDDK NIH HHS R18 DK075692
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleAims and Objective: The validation study of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) questionnaire suggested a 5-factor structure determined a priori, but subsequent analyses have questioned the validity of the original factor structure. This study analyzed the factor structure of the PACIC using a large and diverse patient sample, and evaluated the identified factors through the lens of recent transformational initiatives in primary care.

methodsConvenience samples of adults completed surveys in waiting rooms during clinic visits. Primary care patients with 1 or more chronic illnesses with complete PACIC responses at baseline from 39 clinics (n=1,567) and at follow-up from 36 clinics (n=1,536) participated. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted on baseline and follow-up patient questionnaire data from a cluster randomized controlled trial. Identified factors were evaluated in terms of item loadings, content, reliability, and the extent to which items reflected advances in the delivery of chronic illness care.

resultsAnalyses supported the use of the PACIC summary score. Although a 5-factor model was retained, factor loadings were different from the original PACIC validation study. All factors had sufficient reliability, but findings suggested potential revisions to enhance the factor structure.

conclusionsIt may be time to revise the PACIC to enhance the stability of the subscales (factors) and better reflect recent transformations in the delivery of chronic illness care.

Indexed as

chronic illnessfactor analysispatient care experienceprimary carequestionnaire

Identifiers

PMID27746917
PMCPMC5060942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.