ArticleThe patient2019
Validity of the Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM) Questionnaire.
Article in The patient, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient-reported outcome measures for medication treatment satisfaction: a systematic review of measure development and measurement properties.BMC medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Health-related quality of life of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2020Pooled it
- Patient expectations, experiences and satisfaction with nintedanib and pirfenidone in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a quantitative study.Respiratory research · 2020Trial
- Design of a randomized controlled trial comparing hybrid care with standard care for people with pulmonary fibrosis.Respiratory research · 2026Article
- Development of the Patient Satisfaction with Medication for Diabetes (PSMD) questionnaire.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Patient-reported experience measure (PREM) for patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD): modification of a pre-existing measure.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Article
- Adherence, satisfaction, and quality of life in Wilson disease patients after switching to trientine tetrahydrochloride: observational data from a dual cohort study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Assessment of health-related quality of life in individuals with interstitial lung diseases in a tertiary care hospital in south India.The Indian journal of medical research · 2024Article
- How Pharmacogenomics Informs and Influences the Medication Experience.Innovations in pharmacy · 2023Article
- Patient-centered Outcomes Research in Interstitial Lung Disease: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2021Article
- Health Related Quality of Life in Interstitial Lung Disease: Can We Use the Same Concepts Around the World?Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- The Medication Experience: A Concept Analysis.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Validation of the Spanish Version of Newcastle Stroke-Specific Quality of Life Measure (NEWSQOL).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study assessed the validity and reliability of the generic module of the recently developed Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM) questionnaire in a sample of patients in the Netherlands.
methodsThe generic module of the PESaM questionnaire consists of 18 items related to the domains effectiveness, side effects and ease of use of medications. It assesses patients' experiences regarding the impact of the medication on daily life, health and satisfaction. In 2017, the PESaM questionnaire was sent out to idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patients using pirfenidone or nintedanib, atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome patients receiving eculizumab and patients using tacrolimus after kidney transplantation. Mean scores for each domain were calculated applying a scoring algorithm. Construct validity and reliability were assessed using recommended methods.
results188 participants completed the generic module, of whom 48% used pirfenidone, 36% nintedanib, 11% tacrolimus and 5% eculizumab. The generic module has good structural properties. Internal consistency values of the domains were satisfactory (i.e. Cronbach's coefficient alpha above 0.7). Confirmatory factor analysis provided further evidence for construct validity, with good convergent and discriminant validity. The PESaM questionnaire also showed different scores for patients using different medications, in line with expectations, and was therefore able to differentiate between patient groups. Test-retest reliability of the items and domains were rated as moderate to fair (i.e. intraclass coefficients ranged between 0.18 and 0.76).
conclusionsThe PESaM questionnaire is a unique patient-reported outcome measure evaluating patient experiences and satisfaction with medications. It has been developed in conjunction with patients, ensuring coverage of domains and issues relevant from the patient's perspective. This study has shown promising validity of the generic module of the PESaM questionnaire. Further research is recommended to assess reliability in greater detail as well as the responsiveness of the measure.
trial registrationThe study is registered in The Netherlands National Trial Register (Trial Code 5860).
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.