ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)2020
Development and Scoring of a Survey on Public Health Accreditation Capacity.
Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPublic health accreditation is a 7-step process that starts with a period of preapplication during which a health department assesses its readiness for accreditation. However, no tools with established reliability and validity that quantitatively measure a local health department's (LHD's) capacity for accreditation are available to complete this initial step. We developed and validated a survey to measure accreditation capacity for LHDs.
methodsFrom January through April 2015, we administered a cross-sectional electronic survey instrument with 15 questions that tapped into domains of capacity for public health accreditation. We analyzed and grouped responses by using a confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis with oblique rotations. We assessed reliability by using Cronbach α, and we assessed validity by comparing responses with previously established instruments. We administered the survey to 174 LHD directors in Colorado, Kansas, and Nebraska, 153 (88%) of whom responded.
resultsThe factor analysis produced a 3-factor model of accreditation capacity, suggesting that accreditation capacity depends on 3 distinct latent constructs: support for accreditation, preparation, and planning and approach. The model had good scale reliability (average Cronbach α = 0.7) and validity (average factor correlation = 0.43).
conclusionsThe survey developed and scored in this analysis can be used by LHDs to inform the feasibility of initiating the time-intensive and costly process of accreditation.
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.