ArticlePatient related outcome measures2020
Confirmatory Factor Analyses and Differential Item Functioning of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-Management (PETS vs. 2.0): A Measure of Treatment Burden.
Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-reported outcome measures for patients with chronic comorbidities: a systematic review of psychometric properties.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- The Treatment Burden for Multimorbidity Scale: A Development and Psychometric Validation Study.Nursing & health sciences · 2026Article
- A protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of a Tailored Intervention for people with moderate-to-severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Co-morbidities delivered by Pharmacists and Consultant respiratory Physicians (TICC-PCP) in Scotland.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2025Article
- The Medication-Related Burden Quality of Life (MRB-QoL) tool: A confirmatory factor analysis of the Arabic version.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025Article
- Treatment burden in multimorbidity: an integrative review.BMC primary care · 2024Review
- The Chinese version of patient experience with treatment and self-management (PETS vs. 2.0): translation and validation in patients with multimorbidity in primary care in Hong Kong.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Article
- Scoping review of measures of treatment burden in patients with multimorbidity: advancements and current gaps.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2023Article
- Protocol for the development and validation of a patient reported measure (PRM) of treatment burden in stroke.Health open research · 2023Article
- Longitudinal trajectories of treatment burden: A prospective survey study of adults living with multiple chronic conditions in the midwestern United States.Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidity · 2022Article
- Deriving severity thresholds of treatment burden for the patient experience with treatment and self-management (PETS).Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidityArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo examine the factor structure and differential item functioning (DIF) of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS version 2.0), a measure of treatment burden. PATIENTS AND
methodsVersion 2.0 of the PETS has 60 items, extending the previously-validated 48-item version 1.0 by three domains (nine items) and three additional items in an existing domain. We conducted confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) on survey responses of 439 community-dwelling adults living with multiple chronic conditions who completed PETS version 2.0, using R packages, "lavaan" and "semTools." We tested fit of second-order factors to explore simplifying the reporting of PETS scores. We examined DIF for the two second-order factors with "lordif" R package, testing groups by gender, education, and health literacy, using the McFadden pseudo
resultsThe first-order CFA model featuring 12 multi-item domains had an excellent fit (Comparative Fit Index [CFI]=0.989), as did the second-order CFA model (CFI=0.987), specifying two superordinate factors of treatment burden (workload and impact). Items in the workload and impact second-order factors did not show any DIF across gender, education, and health literacy groups as shown by McFadden pseudo
conclusionFindings support the construct validity and reliability of PETS version 2.0. The fit of a factor model featuring superordinate (ie, second-order) factors of workload and impact supports index scoring that will simplify reporting of PETS scores. DIF analyses indicate that items from these indices can be interpreted in the same way, regardless of gender, education, or health literacy.
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.