ArticleNeuropsychopharmacology reports2020
Development of the Interpersonal Processes of Care Survey-Japanese version.
Article in Neuropsychopharmacology reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- How do patients and families evaluate attitude of psychiatrists in Japan?: quantitative content analysis of open-ended items of patient responses from a large-scale questionnaire survey.BMC psychiatry · 2023Article
- Development of the Interpersonal Processes of Care Survey-Japanese version.Neuropsychopharmacology reports · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsIn the past two decades, there has been growing interest in patient-doctor communication in psychiatry, and several treatment options have been established. This study aimed to develop the Interpersonal Processes of Care Survey-Japanese version (IPC-J), which measures multidimensional communication and the relationship between doctors and patients in Japanese psychiatry.
methodWe conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire survey at one psychiatric hospital and two psychiatric clinics in Japan and investigated the factor validity, convergent validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability of the IPC-J.
resultOverall, 148 eligible patients participated in the study and were included in the analyses. Data from 16 participants were used to examine test-retest reliability. An exploratory factor analysis using 23 items from the IPC scale was performed to clarify the factor structure in a Japanese psychiatric setting. The final IPC-J contained 22 items and a two-factor structural model. High internal consistency (α > .8) and moderate test-retest reliability (interclass correlation > .65) were observed. Regarding convergent validity, the factor 1 "Doctor's communication-related attitudes and skills" was significantly correlated with service satisfaction, empowerment, and medication adherence, whereas the factor 2 "Consideration for the patient's to promote own treatment decisions" was correlated with service satisfaction and medication adherence.
conclusionThe IPC-J appears to be a useful tool for assessing patient views on interpersonal communication with doctors in a Japanese psychiatric setting. While the analysis suggested utilizing an IPC-J with 22 items, the full IPC-J can be used in cross-cultural studies.
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.