Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34563115›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2021

Measuring advance care planning behavior in Dutch adults: translation, cultural adaptation and validation of the Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey.

Doris van der Smissen, Agnes van der Heide, Rebecca L Sudore, Judith A C Rietjens, Ida J Korfage

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2021. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Advance care planning engagement in patients with chronic, life-limiting illness: baseline findings from a cluster-randomised controlled trial in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Doris van der SmissenDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, The Netherlands. d.vandersmissen@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-2363-9416
Agnes van der HeideDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5584-4305
Rebecca L SudoreDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4436-2209
Judith A C RietjensDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0538-5603
Ida J KorfageDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6538-9115
Erasmus MC · NLSan Francisco VA Medical Center · US

Funding

Mentoring Researchers in Advance Care Planning for Underrepresented Older Adults at Risk for Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias and Their CaregiversK24AG054415 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI REBECCA L SUDORE · 2017 to 2026
$1.7M
NIA NIH HHS K24 AG054415
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) enables people to define, discuss, and record preferences for treatment and care. Measures of ACP behavior are lacking in the Netherlands. We aimed to translate, culturally adapt and validate the 34-item ACP Engagement Survey into Dutch.

methodsFollowing validation guidelines, we tested content validity, internal consistency, reproducibility, construct validity, interpretability and criterion validity among persons with and without chronic disease.

resultsForward-backward translation indicated the need of only minor adaptations. Two hundred thirty-two persons completed baseline and retest surveys; 121 were aged ≥60 years. Persons with chronic disease (n = 151) considered the survey more valuable than those without (66 vs. 59, p < 0.001, scale of 20-100), indicating good content validity. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.97) and reproducibility (intraclass correlation: 0.88) were good. Total ACP Engagement was higher among persons with chronic disease than those without (2.9 vs. 2.4, p < 0.01, scale of 1 to 5), indicating good psychometric support for construct validity and interpretability. Positive correlations of the ACP Engagement Survey and the General Self-Efficacy survey indicated good criterion validity (p < 0.05).

conclusionsThis study provided good psychometric support for the validity and reliability of the Dutch 34-item ACP Engagement Survey. This instrument can be used to assess involvement in ACP in adults with and without chronic disease.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningTranslationsAdultHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesAdvance care planningBehavior changeChronic diseaseDutchPatient reported outcome measureTranslationValidation

Identifiers

PMID34563115
PMCPMC8467154
OpenAlexW3204200814

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.