Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29581130›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2018

Primary Care Outcomes Questionnaire: psychometric testing of a new instrument.

Mairead Murphy, Sandra Hollinghurst, Sean Cowlishaw, Chris Salisbury

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Psychometric properties, and cultural appropriateness, of patient reported outcome measures for use in primary healthcare: a scoping review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  5. Paramedic or GP consultations in primary care: prospective study comparing costs and outcomes.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors.

Mairead MurphyCentre for Academic Primary Care (CAPC), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol.
Sandra HollinghurstCentre for Academic Primary Care (CAPC), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol.
Sean CowlishawCentre for Academic Primary Care (CAPC), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol.
Chris SalisburyCentre for Academic Primary Care (CAPC), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients attend primary care for many reasons and to achieve a range of possible outcomes. There is currently no Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) designed to capture these diverse outcomes, and trials of interventions in primary care may thus fail to detect beneficial effects.

aimThis study describes the psychometric testing of the Primary Care Outcomes Questionnaire (PCOQ), which was designed to capture a broad range of outcomes relevant to primary care. DESIGN AND

settingQuestionnaires were administered in primary care in South West England.

methodPatients completed the PCOQ in GP waiting rooms before a consultation, and a second questionnaire, including the PCOQ and seven comparator PROMs, after 1 week. Psychometric testing included exploratory factor analysis on the PCOQ, internal consistency, correlation coefficients between domain scores and comparator measures, and repeated measures effect sizes indicating change across 1 week.

resultsIn total, 602 patients completed the PCOQ at baseline, and 264 (44%) returned the follow-up questionnaire. Exploratory factor analysis suggested four dimensions underlying the PCOQ items: health and wellbeing, health knowledge and self-care, confidence in health provision, and confidence in health plan. Each dimension was internally consistent and correlated as expected with comparator PROMs, providing evidence of construct validity. Patients reporting an improvement in their main problem exhibited small to moderate improvements in relevant domain scores on the PCOQ.

conclusionThe PCOQ was acceptable, feasible, showed strong psychometric properties, and was responsive to change. It is a promising new tool for assessment of outcomes of primary care interventions from a patient perspective.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresPrimary Health CareAdultAgedEnglandFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient ParticipationPsychometricsQualitative ResearchReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adulthealth services researchpatient-centred carepatient-reported outcomesprimary carepsychometricsquality of carequestionnaires

Identifiers

PMID29581130
PMCPMC6001981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.