ArticlePatient preference and adherence2018
Development and validation of an instrument to measure patient engagement in Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient and public perceptions of involvement and engagement in healthcare research: a descriptive exploratory qualitative study in Hong Kong.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Health-related quality of life in primary care patients: a comparison between EQ-5D-5L utility score and EQ-visual analogue scale.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Article
- A Scale for Measuring Electronic Patient Engagement Behaviors: Development and Validation.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Patient Participation and the Environment: A Scoping Review of Instruments.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Current situation and future development of the biopharmaceutical industry in China: A mixed-method study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Satisfaction With Patient Engagement and Self-Reported Depression Among Hospitalized Patients: A Propensity-Score Matching Analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- The Association Between Patients' eHealth Literacy and Satisfaction With Shared Decision-making and Well-being: Multicenter Cross-sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Recovering Quality of Life (ReQoL) Outcome Measure and Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Psychometric Validation and Cultural Adaptation of the Simplified Chinese eHealth Literacy Scale: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Association between antipsychotic use and acute ischemic heart disease in women but not in men: a retrospective cohort study of over one million primary care patients.BMC medicine · 2020Article
- Development and Validation of WeCares, a Survey Instrument to Assess Hospitalized Patients' and Family Members' "Willingness to Engage in Your Care and Safety".Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2020Article
- Information and Communications Technology-Based Interventions Targeting Patient Empowerment: Framework Development.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Validation of the Chinese EORTC chronic lymphocytic leukaemia module - application of classical test theory and item response theory.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2020Article
- Validation of the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (TEQ) Among Medical Students in China: Analyses Using Three Psychometric Methods.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- The relationship between patient engagement and health-related quality of life in patients: a cross-sectional study in general outpatient clinic in Hong Kong SAR, China.Patient preference and adherence · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to develop, pilot test, and psychometrically validate a patient engagement questionnaire, called Patient Engagement Index (PEI), in Hong Kong, China.
methodThe method employed was based on a patient engagement framework and literature review and expert panel discussion. A new measure named PEI with 20 items divided into five factors was developed. A pilot study of 40 patients was used to confirm the clarity of PEI. Explored factor analysis was used to confirm the construct validity. Cronbach's alpha, intercorrelation coefficients (ICCs), and weighted kappa were used to assess the internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability separately. Rasch model and differential item functioning were also used to further confirm the fit of the instrument.
resultsIn all, 324 participants successfully completed the survey. Based on the evaluation of exploratory factor analysis and theoretically considerations, a four-factor structure comprising 20 items was identified. Rasch analysis also confirmed that the model has a good fit (ranging from 0.662 to 1.294). All domains were considered internally consistent (alpha >0.7). Test-retest showed both ICC (>0.6) and weighted kappa (>0.4) meeting the minimum recommended standard. No ceiling or floor effect was found. Furthermore, Spearman's correlation coefficient confirmed that PEI had good internal validity.
conclusionPEI was shown to have good reliability and validity. This is a short, quick, and appropriate tool to assess the extent of patient engagement in both clinical and research settings.
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.