SynthesisBMC emergency medicine2022
Establishing the content validity of a new emergency department patient-reported experience measure (ED PREM): a Delphi study.
Synthesis in BMC emergency medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Surgical patient-reported experience measures and qualitative experience studies: systematic review.BJS open · 2024Pooled it
- Involving patients and caregivers to develop items for a new patient-reported experience measure for older adults attending the emergency department. Findings from a nominal group technique study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Person-centred emergency care: translation and cross-cultural validation of the Australian Emergency Department Patient-Reported Experience Measure (ED PREM) in the Netherlands.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2026Article
- Establishing Consensus on the Appropriate Tool for Measuring Adherence to Glaucoma Medication in a Sub-Saharan African Population: A Multidisciplinary Delphi-Based Study.Public health challenges · 2026Article
- International consensus on school health literacy responsiveness: findings from a modified Delphi process.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- Multicentric Design and Validation of a Set of Democratized Hospital Patient Reported Experience Measures in Spain.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Establishing Consensus on the Breakthrough Pain Assessment Questionnaire-Self Report (BTPAQ-SR) for Typically Developing Children and Young People (8-25 yrs) with Life-Limiting and Life-Threatening Conditions: An International e-Delphi Study of Expert Healthcare Professionals.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Measuring experiences and outcomes of mental distress-related presentations to Australian emergency departments: lived experience perspectives.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Mixed methods scoping review of patients' experiences of urgent and emergency cancer care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a Delphi consensus-based questionnaire for the multidisciplinary management of type 2 inflammation-related diseases.Frontiers in allergy · 2025Article
- Bi-lingual content validation of the Non-Technical Skills for Operating Room Nurses (NOTSORN) tool: A Delphi study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2024Article
- Validation of a national leadership framework to promote and protect quality residential aged care: protocol for a Delphi study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Development of the Parental Experience with Care for Children with Serious Illnesses (PRECIOUS) quality of care measure.BMC palliative care · 2024Article
- Development of a Patient-Reported Experience Measure Tool for Ambulatory Patients With Acute Unexpected Needs: The APEX Questionnaire.Journal of patient experience · 2024Article
- Development of a low-cost congenital abdominal wall defect simulator (wall-go) for undergraduate medical education: a validation study.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Application of the Delphi Method for Content Validity Analysis of a Questionnaire to Determine the Risk Factors of the Chemsex.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Validation of the accident and emergency experience questionnaire: a cross-sectional survey.BMC health services research · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported experience measures aim to capture the patient's perspective of what happened during a care encounter and how it happened. However, due to a lack of guidance to support patient-reported experience measure development and reporting, the content validity of many instruments is unclear and ambiguous. Thus, the aim of this study was to establish the content validity of a newly developed Emergency Department Patient-Reported Experience Measure (ED PREM).
methodsED PREM items were developed based on the findings of a systematic mixed studies review, and qualitative interviews with Emergency Department patients that occurred during September and October, 2020. Individuals who participated in the qualitative interviews were approached again during August 2021 to participate in the ED PREM content validation study. The preliminary ED PREM comprised 37 items. A two-round modified, online Delphi study was undertaken where patient participants were asked to rate the clarity, relevance, and importance of ED PREM items on a 4-point content validity index scale. Each round lasted for two-weeks, with 1 week in between for analysis. Consensus was a priori defined as item-level content validity index scores of ≥0.80. A scale-level content validity index score was also calculated.
resultsFifteen patients participated in both rounds of the online Delphi study. At the completion of the study, two items were dropped and 13 were revised, resulting in a 35-item ED PREM. The scale-level content validity index score for the final 35-item instrument was 0.95.
conclusionsThe newly developed ED PREM demonstrates good content validity and aligns strongly with the concept of Emergency Department patient experience as described in the literature. The ED PREM will next be administered in a larger study to establish its' construct validity and reliability. There is an imperative for clear guidance on PREM content validation methodologies. Thus, this study may inform the efforts of other researchers undertaking PREM content validation.
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.