ArticleBMC anesthesiology2022
Validation of the translated version of the EVAN-G scale in a Chinese-speaking population.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Circulating-Water Mattress Enhances Thermal Comfort and Patient Satisfaction but Shows Non-Superiority in Temperature Maintenance in Ophthalmic Day-Case Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to translate the French version of a perioperative satisfaction questionnaire (EVAN-G) scale, a validated questionnaire for assessing perioperative patient satisfaction, into a Chinese version and validate it in Chinese-speaking patients.
methodsWe developed the Chinese version of the EVAN-G (EVAN-GC) scale based on the original French version of the EVAN-G. The EVAN-GC scale, the Short version of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (S-STAI), and the McGill pain questionnaire (MGPQ) were administered on the WeChat mini program. We invited patients to complete these questionnaires within 4 to 24 h after surgery. The psychometric validation of the EVAN-GC scale included validity, reliability, and acceptability.
resultsAmong 220 patients, 217 (98.6%) completed the EVAN-GC scale after surgery. The item-internal consistency revealed good construct validity. Compared with the total scores of the S-STAI and MGPQ, the EVAN-GC scale showed excellent convergent validity (ρ = - 0.32, P < 0.001; ρ = - 0.29, P < 0.001). The EVAN-GC scale could differentiate between groups, which showed good discriminate validity. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient (0.85) of the translated scale demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency reliability, and a 36-patient subsample retest evidenced good test-retest reliability (ρ = 0.82, P < 0.001). In addition, the median [interquartile range] time of completing the EVAN-GC scale was 3.7 [2.9-4.9] min.
conclusionsThe EVAN-GC scale has good psychometric properties similar to those of the original French version. The EVAN-GC scale is a valid and reliable measurement to assess patient satisfaction in Chinese-speaking patients.
trial registrationThe Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2100049555.
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.