Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35999591›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2022

Translating and validating a Japanese version of the instrument for patient assessment of medical professionalism (J-IPAMP): a cross-sectional survey.

Hirohisa Fujikawa, Daisuke Son, Takuya Aoki, Kayo Kondo, Yousuke Takemura, Minoru Saito, Naoko Den, Masato Eto

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors.

Hirohisa FujikawaDepartment of Medical Education Studies, International Research Center for Medical Education, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan. hirohisa.fujikawa@gmail.com.
Daisuke SonDepartment of Medical Education Studies, International Research Center for Medical Education, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.
Takuya AokiDivision of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Center for Medical Sciences, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Kayo KondoSchool of Modern Languages and Cultures, Durham University, Durham, UK.
Yousuke TakemuraDepartment of General Medicine, Graduate School of Medical Science, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Minoru SaitoDepartment of Internal Medicine, Suwa Central Hospital, Chino, Nagano, Japan.
Naoko DenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Oji Seikyo Hospital, Tokyo Hokuto Health Co-Operative, Kita-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Masato EtoDepartment of Medical Education Studies, International Research Center for Medical Education, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough there are many tools to assess medical professionalism, they rarely address patients' perspectives. The instrument for patient assessment of medical professionalism (IPAMP) comprises 11 items and has been established and validated as a valuable tool for assessing trainees' professionalism from the patient's perspective. However, there is no instrument to assess professionalism from the patient's perspective in Japan. The purpose of the present study was to develop a Japanese version of the IPAMP (J-IPAMP) and test its validity and reliability.

methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey to examine the reliability and validity of the J-IPAMP in two hospitals (one each in an urban and rural area) in Japan. Receptionists or surveyors distributed the anonymous questionnaire to 276 inpatients; all participants were aged above 20 years and assigned to medical trainees. We evaluated its structural and criterion-related validity, as well as internal consistency reliability.

resultsData of 235 (85.1%) patients were analyzed. Using the split-half validation technique, we performed an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) along with a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The EFA showed a one-factor solution. Then, to compare the model fitness between two models (the two-factor model from the original English version vs. unidimensional model suggested by the EFA), the CFA was performed. The CFA showed that almost all of the fit indices met their respective criteria and were approximately the same for the two models. Thus, we adopted a single-factor model. The Pearson correlation coefficients between the total J-IPAMP scores and the global ratings were 0.738, indicating adequate criterion-related validity. The Cronbach's alpha of the 11 items of the instrument was 0.96 (95% confidence interval: 0.96-0.97) and the omega value was 0.96, demonstrating acceptable internal consistency reliability.

conclusionsWe developed the Japanese version of the IPAMP. Its validity and reliability were verified through analysis. This instrument can be utilized for professionalism education in the postgraduate training setting.

Indexed as

ProfessionalismTranslatingAgedCross-Sectional StudiesHumansJapanPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesMedical professionalismReliabilityScale developmentValidity

Identifiers

PMID35999591
PMCPMC9396761

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.