ArticleBMJ open2019
Exploring the psychometric properties of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care measurement tool for care providers in Australia.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring integrated hypertension care in community health centers: a cross-sectional study based on the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care in Chengdu, China.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Integration of oral health promotion in primary school health programs: A scoping review.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Patients' and Care Professionals' Evaluation of the Effect of a Hospital Group on Integrated Care in Chinese Urban Health Systems: A Propensity Score Matching and Difference-in-differences Regression Approach.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Integrated primary care and social services for older adults with multimorbidity in England: a scoping review.BMC geriatrics · 2021Article
- Effect of Collaborative Governance on Medical and Nursing Service Combination: An Evaluation Based on Delphi and Entropy Method.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Validation Study of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care-Measurement Tool for Patients in China.International journal of integrated care · 2021Article
- Article
- Stakeholder theory and management: Understanding longitudinal collaboration networks.PloS one · 2021Article
- Validation of the care providers version of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care-measurement tool in Chinese primary care systems.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Construct Validation of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care Measurement Tool in Dutch Primary Care for Older Adults.International journal of integrated careArticle
- Implementation of Integrated Care for the Aged Population in Anhui and Fujian Province of China: A Qualitative Study.International journal of integrated careArticle
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
objectiveTo assess the reliability and validity of a shortened version of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care (RMIC) measurement tool (MT). The original version of the measurement tool has been modified (shortened) for the Australian context.
designValidation of the psychometric properties of the RMIC-MT.
settingHealthcare providers providing services to a geographically defined rural area in New South Wales (NSW), Australia.
participantsA sample of 56 healthcare providers providing mental and physical healthcare.
main outcome measuresThe psychometric properties of the tool were tested using principal component analysis for validity and Cronbach's alpha for reliability.
resultsThe tool was shown to have good validity and reliability. The 35 items used in the shortened version of the tool were reduced to 29 items grouped into four dimensions: community-governance orientation, normative integration, functional integration and clinical-professional coordination.
conclusionsThe shortened version of the RMIC-MT is a valid and reliable tool that evaluates integrated care from a healthcare provider's perspective in NSW, Australia. In order to assess the tool's appropriateness in an international context, future studies should focus on validating the tool in other healthcare 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.