ArticleDisability and health journal2020
Developing a measure of blind patients' interactions with their healthcare providers.
Article in Disability and health journal, 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.
- "To Be Treated as a Person and Not as a Disease Entity"-Expectations of People with Visual Impairments towards Primary Healthcare: Results of the Mixed-Method Survey in Poland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- An Exploratory Mixed Methods Study of Diabetes self-management in Blind Americans.Western journal of nursing research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeople who are blind (PWB) are often perceived as being incompetent with common tasks and functions. When patients detect that their healthcare providers (HCPs) have negative perceptions of them, they often report less satisfaction with their healthcare and disengage in their own healthcare.
objectiveA scale assessing the experiences of PWB interacting with HCPs was developed and validated across two studies.
methodsIn Study 1, 144 participants completed the scale and provided feedback. In Study 2, 214 participants completed the scale and 4 additional scales to assess construct validity.
resultsAn exploratory factor analysis in Study 1 revealed a two-factor model consisting of General Quality of Health Care (30.5% variance explained) and Stereotype Content-related items (9.4% variance explained). Study 2 confirmed and validated this two-factor structure (RMSEA (90% CI) = 0.068 (0.057, 0.079), CFI = 0.898, SRMR = 0.066, AIC = 14568.902).
conclusionsThis scale is one of the first tools developed from the perspectives of PWB. Results from these studies highlight and elaborate on how PWB perceive that they are viewed by their HCPs in terms of competence and how they perceive to be treated by these HCPs. This scale can be used in training HCPs to better serve their patients with disabilities.
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.