Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30684633›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain and symptom management2019

Adaptation and Preliminary Validation of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey for Surrogate Decision Makers.

Lauren J Van Scoy, Andrew G Day, Michelle Howard, Rebecca Sudore, Daren K Heyland

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain and symptom management, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Lauren J Van ScoyMedicine, Humanities and Public Health Sciences, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA. Electronic address: lvanscoy@pennstatehealth.psu.edu.
Andrew G DayKingston General Health Research Institute and Clinical Evaluation Unit, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Michelle HowardDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Rebecca SudoreDivision of Geriatrics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Daren K HeylandDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Clinical Evaluation Research Unit, Kingston General Health Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

Mentoring Researchers in Advance Care Planning for Underrepresented Older Adults at Risk for Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias and Their CaregiversK24AG054415 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI REBECCA L SUDORE · 2017 to 2026
$1.7M
NIA NIH HHS K24 AG054415
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextAlthough measures that assess patient engagement in the advance care planning (ACP) process exist, there are no validated tools to assess surrogate decision makers' (SDMs') role in ACP.

objectivesThe objective of this study was to adapt and begin to validate a patient-oriented questionnaire for use with SDMs of patients with chronic illness.

methodsQuestions from the 55-item patient-oriented ACP engagement survey were adapted for SDMs and assessed for face validity. The resultant 47-item questionnaire was administered to 65 SDMs of patients with chronic illness. Responses were assessed and items were flagged for removal based on item redundancy, nonresponses, and ceiling effects. A preliminary exploratory factor analysis was performed, internal consistency was assessed, and domains were constructed based on findings.

resultsThe 47-item questionnaire was administered to 65 participants (mean age 51.8; 81% female; 96% Caucasian). Seventeen items were removed owing to redundancy (r > 0.80), and 13 items lacking face validity were removed. In a preliminary exploratory factor analysis of the resultant 17-item questionnaire, a three-factor solution was deemed most statistically and conceptually sound. Items were organized into domains: 1) serving as an SDM (seven items); 2) contemplation (four items); 3) readiness (six items). Internal consistency for each domain was high (Cronbach alpha 0.90-0.91).

conclusionThe 17-item ACP engagement survey for SDMs (ACP-17-SDM) is a conceptually sound and reliable questionnaire adaptation of the original ACP engagement survey. This questionnaire may be used by researchers in parallel with the patient-oriented ACP engagement survey to more fully understand the impact of ACP interventions on SDMs. Larger studies are needed to more closely examine construct validity.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningCaregiversPatient ParticipationSurveys and QuestionnairesChronic DiseaseDecision MakingFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPreliminary DataProspective StudiesProxyPsychometricsAdvance care planningcaregiversdecision makingpsychometricssurveys and questionnairesterminal care

Identifiers

PMID30684633
PMCPMC6857702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.