Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35255277›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2022

Development and Validation of the Trust in My Doctor, Trust in Doctors in General, and Trust in the Health Care Team Scales.

Jennifer Richmond, Marcella H Boynton, Sachiko Ozawa, Kathryn E Muessig, Samuel Cykert, Kurt M Ribisl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Constructing a Conceptual Model for Measuring Physician-Patient Trust: Integrating Theory and Research.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Factors influencing confidence and trust in health professionals: a cross-sectional study of English general practices.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  7. Development of Survey Measures of Uncontrolled Vaping and Vaping Restraint.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Jennifer RichmondVanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Medicine, Division of Genetic Medicine, 2525 West End Ave, 7th Floor Suite, Nashville, TN, 37203, USA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, Department of Health Behavior, 135 Dauer Drive, 302 Rosenau Hall, CB #7440, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. Electronic address: jennifer.richmond@vumc.org.
Marcella H BoyntonUniversity of North Carolina School of Medicine, North Carolina Translational & Clinical Sciences Institute (NC TraCS), 160 N. Medical Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA; University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, 5034 Old Clinic Building, CB#7110, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, 101 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514, USA.
Sachiko OzawaUniversity of North Carolina, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Division of Practice Advancement and Clinical Education, CB #7574, Beard Hall 115G, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Kathryn E MuessigUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, Department of Health Behavior, 135 Dauer Drive, 302 Rosenau Hall, CB #7440, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Samuel CykertUniversity of North Carolina School of Medicine, Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, 5034 Old Clinic Building, CB#7110, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Kurt M RibislUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Gillings School of Global Public Health, Department of Health Behavior, 135 Dauer Drive, 302 Rosenau Hall, CB #7440, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, 101 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514, USA.

Funding

Learning Health System training program: PROgRESS--Patient/ pRactice Outcomes and Research in Effectiveness and Systems ScienceT32HS026122 · AHRQ · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI GRIJALVA, CARLOS G, ROUMIE, CHRISTIANNE L. · 2018 to 2024
$3.5M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS026122NCI NIH HHS L60 CA264691
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleHistoric and present-day racism and inequity in the United States (U.S.) have resulted in diminished trust in health care among many populations. A key barrier to improving trust in health care is a dearth of well-validated measures appropriate for diverse populations. Indeed, systematic reviews indicate a need to develop and test updated trust measures that are multidimensional and inclusive of relevant domains (e.g., fairness).

objectiveWe developed three trust measures: the Trust in My Doctor (T-MD), Trust in Doctors in General (T-DiG), and Trust in the Health Care Team (T-HCT) scales.

methodsAfter developing an initial item pool, expert reviewers (n = 6) provided feedback on the face validity of each scale. We conducted cognitive interviews (n = 21) with a convenience sample of adults to ensure items were interpreted as intended. In 2020, we administered an online survey to a convenience sample of U.S. adults recruited through the Qualtrics Panel (n = 801) to assess scale reliability and validity.

resultsExploratory and confirmatory factor analyses indicated acceptable model fit for second order latent factor models for each scale (root mean square error of approximation: <0.07, comparative fit index: ≥0.98, and standardized root mean square residual: ≤0.03). The T-MD contained 25 items and six subscales: communication competency, fidelity, systems trust, confidentiality, fairness, and global trust. The T-DiG and T-HCT each contained 29 items and seven subscales (the same subscales in the T-MD plus an additional subscale related to stigma-based discrimination). Each scale was strongly correlated with existing trust measures and perceived racism in health care and was significantly associated with delayed health care seeking and receipt of a routine health exam.

conclusionsThe multidimensional T-MD, T-DiG, and T-HCT scales have sound psychometric properties and may be useful for researchers evaluating trust-related interventions or conducting studies where trust is an important construct or main outcome.

Indexed as

Patient Care TeamTrustAdultFactor Analysis, StatisticalHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesDoctorsHealth careHealth equityMistrustScale developmentScale validationTrustUnited States

Identifiers

PMID35255277
PMCPMC9014823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.