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.
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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Health engagement: a systematic review of tools modifiable for use with vulnerable pregnant women.BMJ open · 2023Pooled it
- Interventions for involving older patients with multi-morbidity in decision-making during primary care consultations.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Investigation of the Content Validity, Feasibility, Internal Consistency, and Construct Validity of 5 Patient-Reported Outcome Questions on Patient Involvement in Care Among Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: Multimethods Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2026Article
- 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 · 2025Article
- 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 · 2025Article
- Health checks for autistic adults: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.Trials · 2024Article
- Evaluating video and hybrid group consultations in general practice: mixed-methods, participatory study protocol (TOGETHER 2).NIHR open research · 2024Article
- Measure what we want: a taxonomy of short generic person-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs).BMJ open quality · 2020Article
- General practitioners' views on use of patient reported outcome measures in primary care: a cross-sectional survey and qualitative study.BMC family practice · 2020Article
- Adaption and validation of the Working Alliance Inventory for General Practice: qualitative review and cross-sectional surveys.Family practice · 2019Review
- Patient understanding of two commonly used patient reported outcome measures for primary care: a cognitive interview study.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Qualitative assessment of the primary care outcomes questionnaire: a cognitive interview study.BMC health services research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
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
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.