Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33976595›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2021

A Validation Study of the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care-Measurement Tool for Patients in China.

Xin Wang, Stephen Birch, Lijin Chen, Yixiang Huang, Pim Valentijn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of integrated care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Xin WangSchool of Public Health, Health Development Research Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6588-276X
Stephen BirchCentre for the Business and Economics of Health, University of Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1372-0440
Lijin ChenSchool of Public Health, Health Development Research Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1125-7624
Yixiang HuangSchool of Public Health, Health Development Research Center, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3370-148X
Pim ValentijnDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9788-1275
Development Research Center · CNMaastricht University · NLThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe original Rainbow Model of Integrated Care Measurement Tool (RMIC-MT) is based on the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care (RMIC), which provides a comprehensive theoretical framework for integrated care. The aim of this paper is to modify the original patient version of the RMIC-MT for the Chinese primary care context and validate its psychometric properties.

methodsThe translation and adaptation processes were performed in four steps, forward and back-translation, experts review and pre-testing. We conducted a cross-sectional study with 386 patients with diabetes attending one of 20 community health stations in the Nanshan district. We analyzed the distribution of responses to each item to study the psychometric sensitivity. Exploratory factor analysis with principal axis extraction method was used to assess the construct validity. Confirmation factor analysis was used to evaluate model fit of the modified version. Cronbach's alpha was used to ascertain the internal consistency reliability.

resultsDuring the translation and adaptation process, all 24 items were retained with some detailed modifications. No item was found to have psychometric sensitivity problems. Five factors (person-centeredness, clinical integration, professional integration, team-based coordination, organizational integration) with 15 items were determined by exploratory factor analysis, accounting for 53.51% of the total variance. Good internal consistency was achieved with each item correlated the highest on an assigned subscale and Cronbach's alpha score of 0.890. Moderately positive associations (r≥ 0.4, p<0.01) between the score of the scale and these correlations indicate good construct validity.

conclusionsThe results showed initial satisfactory psychometric properties for the validation of the Chinese RMIC-MT patient version. Its application in China will promote the development of people-centered integrated primary care. However, future studies with diverse samples crossing regions would be needed to test its psychometric properties for the various Chinese primary care contexts.

Indexed as

integrated caremeasurement toolpatients with diabetesprimary care

Identifiers

PMID33976595
PMCPMC8064292
OpenAlexW3156565090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.