Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37610497›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2023

Further development and evaluation of a questionnaire targeting person-centred outpatient care for persons with long-term conditions.

Fredrik Gasser, Sidona-Valentina Bala, Albert Westergren, Joakim Ekstrand, Peter Hagell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Moving forward, leaving the patients behind? A multilevel assessment framework for evaluating patient-centred, integrated care quality.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fredrik GasserThe Pro-CARE Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden. fredrik.gasser@hkr.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6467-0009
Sidona-Valentina BalaDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6328-5216
Albert WestergrenThe Pro-CARE Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4820-6203
Joakim EkstrandThe Pro-CARE Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7364-1683
Peter HagellThe Pro-CARE Group, Faculty of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2174-372X
Kristianstad University · SELund University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo further develop the Person-Centred Care instrument for outpatient care (PCCoc), evaluate its user-friendliness and content validity, and to explore its basic psychometric properties in various outpatient settings for adults with long-term conditions.

backgroundPerson-centred care (PCC) has been identified as a key factor to provide high-quality care. However, there is still a lack of instruments that are based on a clearly defined framework for PCC for persons with long-term conditions in an outpatient context. The PCCoc is a patient-reported experience measure under development aiming to fill this gap.

methodsFirst, the 35-item PCCoc was reviewed and further developed in collaboration with a user-council. Second, the revised 36-item PCCoc was tested among persons receiving outpatient care for various long-term conditions. A total of 179 persons with long-term conditions from four different specialties participated in the study. User-friendliness and content validity were assessed through structured interviews and relevance ratings of each item. Content validity index (CVI) for individual items (I-CVI) and for the overall scale (S-CVI) were calculated, and basic psychometric properties of the PCCoc using classical test theory were explored.

resultsIt took a median of 8 min for participants to complete the PCCoc. The majority found items easy to understand, response categories distinct and that no important areas were missing. Results from the CVI analyses suggested that participants found the content of the PCCoc relevant (I-CVI range 0.82-1, S-CVI = 0.95). All psychometric properties examined were satisfactory (e.g., item-total correlations, 0.45-0.75; Cronbach's alpha, 0.96; test-retest stability, 0.83).

conclusionThe PCCoc was considered user-friendly and relevant by the intended users, and its psychometric properties were satisfactory. This implies that the PCCoc can be a valuable instrument for evaluating and developing PCC in outpatient care for persons with long-term conditions. However, further studies of the PCCoc are needed to establish its measurement properties in various outpatient settings.

Indexed as

MedicineOutpatientsAdultAmbulatory CareHumansPatient-Centered CarePsychometricsOutpatient carePatient-reported experience measurePerson-centred careReliabilityValidity

Identifiers

PMID37610497
PMCPMC10447667
OpenAlexW4386083963

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.