ArticleHealth services research2018
Cross-Cultural Validation of the Patient Perception of Integrated Care Survey.
Article in Health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Content Refinement and Multicenter Validation of the ELIGES Patient Experience Questionnaire Focused on Nursing Care During Hospitalization: Study Protocol.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- Giving more detailed information about health insurance encourages consumers to choose compromise options.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Can Organisational Culture of Teams Be a Lever for Integrating Care? An Exploratory Study.International journal of integrated care · 2019Article
- Organizational Coordination and Patient Experiences of Specialty Care Integration.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo test the cross-cultural validity of the U.S. Patient Perception of Integrated Care (PPIC) Survey in a Dutch sample using a standardized procedure. DATA SOURCES: Primary data collected from patients of five primary care centers in the south of the Netherlands, through survey research from 2014 to 2015. STUDY
designCross-sectional data collected from patients who saw multiple health care providers during 6 months preceding data collection. DATA COLLECTION: The PPIC survey includes 59 questions that measure patient perceived care integration across providers, settings, and time. Data analysis followed a standardized procedure guiding data preparation, psychometric analysis, and included invariance testing with the U.S. dataset. PRINCIPAL
findingsLatent scale structures of the Dutch and U.S. survey were highly comparable. Factor "Integration with specialist" had lower reliability scores and noninvariance. For the remaining factors, internal consistency and invariance estimates were strong.
conclusionsThe standardized cross-cultural validation procedure produced strong support for comparable psychometric characteristics of the Dutch and U.S. surveys. Future research should examine the usability of the proposed procedure for contexts with greater cultural differences.
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.