ArticlePrimary health care research & development2019
Development of primary care assessment tool-adult version in Tibet: implication for low- and middle-income countries.
Article in Primary health care research & development, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the Generalizability of Client Experience Measurement Tools in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Narrative Review.Global health, science and practice · 2025Review
- Service Quality Assessment of Digital Health Solutions in Outpatient Care: Qualitative Item Repository Development Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Adaptation and validation of the Ugandan Primary Care Assessment Tool.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2023Article
- Capturing What Matters with Patients' Bypass Behavior? Evidence from a Cross-Sectional Study in China.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
- Primary care experiences among Brazilian adults: Cross-sectional evidence from the 2019 National Health Survey.PloS one · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo conduct advanced psychometric analysis of Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) in Tibet and identify avenues for metric performance improvement.
backgroundMeasuring progress toward high-performing primary health care can contribute to the achievement of sustainable development goals. The adult version of PCAT is an instrument for measuring patient experience, with key elements of primary care. It has been extensively used and validated internationally. However, only little information is available regarding its psychometric properties obtained based on advanced analysis.
methodsWe used data collected from 1386 primary care users in two prefectures in Tibet. First, iterative confirmatory factor analysis examined the fit of the primary care construct in the original tool. Then item response theory analysis evaluated how well the questions and individual response options perform at different levels of patient experience. Finally, multiple logistic regression modeling examined the predicative validity of primary care domains against patient satisfaction.
findingsA best final structure for the PCAT-Tibetan includes 7 domains and 27 items. Confirmatory factor analysis suggests good fit for a unidimensional model for items within each domain but doesn't support a unidimensional model for the entire instrument with all domains. Non-parametric and parametric item response theory analysis models show that for most items, the favorable response option (4 = definitely) is overwhelmingly endorsed, the discriminability parameter is over 1, and the difficulty parameters are all negative, suggesting that the items are most sensitive and specific for patients with poor primary care experience. Ongoing care is the strongest predictor of patient satisfaction. These findings suggest the need for some principles in adapting the tool to different health system contexts, more items measuring excellent primary care experience, and update of the four-point response options.
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.