ArticleBMC health services research2019
Psychometric properties of primary health care trust questionnaire.
Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trust in Medicine: A Scoping Review of the Instruments Designed to Measure Trust in Medical Care Studies.Journal of caring sciences · 2024Article
- Trust in primary health care and COVID-19 vaccine uptake among Iranian pediatric: a web-based cross-sectional survey.BMC pediatrics · 2024Article
- Measuring Trust in Primary Care.The Milbank quarterly · 2023Review
- Understanding HPV-positive women's needs and experiences in relation to patient-provider communication issues: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Measuring client trust in community health workers: A multi-country validation study.Journal of global health · 2021Article
- Forty years after Alma-Ata: how people trust primary health care?BMC 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTrust has been introduced as the cornerstone of the public and health providers' relation. Public trust in primary health care (PHC) is crucial and must be measured. The aim of this study was to develop and validate PHC trust measurement tool.
methodsThis was a psychometric study to develop PHC trust measuring tool done in Tabriz, East-Azerbaijan with participation of 600 households in 2016. Item generation was done through literature review and experts opinions. The content validity, reliability and construct validity of the PHC trust tool were assessed using several statistical methods including modified Kappa, Kendall's Tau and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) as well as exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Data were analyzed using STATA 14 statistical software package.
resultsA 30-item questionnaire was developed. The Modified Kappa coefficient as an indicator of content validity assessment was 0.94. With respect to reliability assessment, a high internal consistency was observed with 0.98 Cronbach-Alpha score and the test-retest reliability for overall scale (assessed by ICC) was 0.94 (CI: 0.87-0.97). Exploratory factor analysis emerged 2 factors. Factor 1 consisted of 25 items accounting for 74.1% of the variance (eigenvalue = 22.47) followed by Factor 2 consisting of 5 items accounting for 19.2% of the variance (eigenvalue = 1.6).
conclusionPHC trust measuring tool could be used as a valid and reliable tool by health systems in Iran and similar contexts to investigate how they are trustful from the public viewpoint.
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.