ArticlePEC innovation2023
Validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ-J) for evaluating oncologist consultations.
Article in PEC innovation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Clinicians' Empathetic Communication on Anxiety: A Randomized Video Vignette Study.Journal of general and family medicine · 2026Article
- Online peer support for breast cancer survivors: protocol for a decentralized multicenter open-label pilot randomized controlled trial (HOPE-BC study).International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Patient satisfaction with cross-boundary healthcare: a cross-sectional study of Hong Kong residents' healthcare utilization in mainland China.BMC health services research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop the Japanese version of the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ-J) and examine its validity and reliability. Methods: A cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted among cancer patients in Japan. The PSQ-J was developed following the forward-backward translation method, using a numerical rating scale. Data on patient characteristics and psychometric scales, like the PSQ-J, willingness to recommend an oncologist to others, trust in the healthcare system, uncertainty, and the Physician Compassion Questionnaire were collected. Validity was examined using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and by calculating the correlations between the total PSQ-J score and the criterion variables. Reliability was confirmed by Cronbach's alpha and test-retest score correlations at a two-week interval. Results: The first and second surveys were conducted on 309 and 107 patients, respectively. One-dimensionality and model fit were verified using factor analyses. The PSQ-J was significantly associated with other comparable scales. Cronbach's alpha was 0.962; the correlation between the PSQ-J test-retest scores was 0.835 ( Conclusion: The current study indicates that the PSQ-J can be valid and reliable for assessing satisfaction with oncologist consultation. Innovation: The PSQ-J enables the effective assessment of patient satisfaction with oncologist consultations, leading to better practice reflecting the patient's viewpoint.
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.