ArticleAnnals of cardiac anaesthesia
Validated tool for quality assessment of anesthesia services by cardiac surgeons.
Article in Annals of cardiac anaesthesia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Design and Content Validation using Expert Opinions of an Instrument Assessing the Lifestyle of Adults: The 'PONTE A 100' Questionnaire.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: The role of the cardiac anaesthesiologists extends beyond mere patient wellbeing to diagnostic input and active participation in decision making during cardiac surgery. The quality of service provision should therefore be judged not only by patient satisfaction but also by the satisfaction of cardiac surgeons. Unfortunately, quantification of cardiac surgeon satisfaction remains a challenge due to the absence of a reliable and validated tool. We therefore attempted to develop a robust, validated, pilot psychometric questionnaire, to measure satisfaction of cardiac surgeons' to cardiac anesthesia services. Methods: The questionnaire was developed with the help of senior cardiac anesthesiologist, cardiac surgeon and statistician with database search in PubMed and the Cochrane Library. The questionnaire was tested for content validity, comprehensibility, and identification of new items. This generated the second version of the questionnaire with nine socio-demographic and professional questions, 46 Likert type questions, an abridged Marlowe Crowne Social Desirability scale and one open ended question. This questionnaire was e-mailed to 100 cardiac surgeons requesting them to participate via a web-based survey application. Results: Content validity of the responses was tested by Aiken's content validity coefficient (V). Internal consistency was tested with Chronbach's alpha. Fifty-two cardiac surgeons participated in the survey. Twelve Likert type questions were deleted due to low V values. Excellent Chronbach's alpha (0.94) was obtained in the remaining 34 items. Conclusions: We have developed a questionnaire that includes 34 variables and allows quantifying surgeon satisfaction in a reliable fashion and is validated for the purpose.
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.