ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022
Development and content validity of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT)-A best practice example for generating patient-reported measures from qualitative data.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-Reported Experience Measures in Adult Inpatient Settings: A Systematic Review.Journal of nursing management · 2024Pooled it
- Using cognitive interviews with children to test the content validity of a paediatric patient reported experience measure.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Article
- Career choice, training satisfaction, and retention intentions among healthcare apprentices: a cross-sectional study in rural Germany.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Article
- [Measuring patient experiences in healthcare-overview of methods and the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT) as an example].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Review
- Patient-reported experience measure (PREM) for patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD): modification of a pre-existing measure.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Article
- Through the patients' eyes: psychometric evaluation of the 64-item version of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT-64).BMJ quality & safety · 2025Article
- Development and Psychometric Testing of EPAT-16: A Short and Valid Measure for Patient-Centeredness From the Patient's Perspective.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Development and application of patient-reported experience measures for cancer patients: a scoping review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Review
- Assessment of relevance and actual implementation of person-centeredness in healthcare and social support services for women with unintended pregnancy in Germany (CarePreg): results of expert workshops.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Evaluation of a patient-centered communication skills training for nurses (KOMPAT): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Development and content validation of a questionnaire to assess the social determinants of mental health in clinical practice.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Article
- Development and content validity of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT)-A best practice example for generating patient-reported measures from qualitative data.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo effectively foster patient-centeredness (PC), it is crucial to measure its implementation. So far, there is no German measure to assess PC comprehensively. The aim of this study is to develop and select items for the Experienced Patient-Centeredness (EPAT) Questionnaire, a patient-reported experience measure (PREM). The EPAT intends to assess PC from the perspective of adult patients treated for different chronic diseases in inpatient and outpatient settings in Germany. Furthermore, we aim at providing a best-practice example for developing PREMs from qualitative data.
methodsThe development process comprised a three-phase mixed-method design: (1) preparation, (2) item generation and (3) item selection and testing of content validity. We generated items using qualitative content analysis based on information from focus groups, key informant interviews and literature search. We selected items using relevance rating and cognitive interviews. Participants were patients from four chronic disease groups (cancer, cardiovascular disease, mental disorder, musculoskeletal disorder) and healthcare experts (e.g., clinicians, researchers, patient representatives).
resultsWe conducted six focus groups with a total of 40 patients, key informant interviews with 10 experts and identified 48 PREMs from international literature. After team discussion, we reached a preliminary pool of 152 items. We conducted a relevance rating with 32 experts and 34 cognitive interviews with 21 patients. We selected 125 items assessing 16 dimensions of PC and showed high relevance and comprehensibility.
conclusionsThe EPAT questionnaire is currently undergoing psychometric testing. The transparent step-by-step report provides a best practice example that other researchers may consider for developing PREMs. Integrating literature and experts with a strong focus on patient feedback ensured good content validity. The EPAT questionnaire will be helpful in assessing PC in routine clinical practice in inpatient and outpatient settings for research and quality improvement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients were not involved as active members of the research team. While developing the funding proposal, we informally reached out to several patient organizations who all gave us positive feedback on the study aims, thereby confirming their relevance. Those patient organizations endorsed the funding proposal with formal letters of support and supported recruitment by disseminating advertisements for study participation.
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.