ArticleBMC psychiatry2023
The validity and IRT psychometric analysis of Chinese version of Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire (DDPRQ-10).
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and influencing factors of workplace violence among doctors in Northeast China: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the M.D. Anderson symptom Inventory-Multiple Myeloma Module: a translation and validation study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Current situation and related factors of fatigue among doctors and nurses in tertiary general hospitals in Northeast China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The impact of mosaic loss of the Y chromosome (mLOY) in men of advanced age.Biogerontology · 2024Review
- The Chinese version of Defensive Medicine Scale (DMS): reliability and validity test among physicians.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Prevalence and associated factors of insomnia symptoms among doctors and nurses under the context of high prevalence of multiple infectious diseases: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe doctor-patient relationship (DPR) plays a crucial role in the Chinese healthcare system, functioning to improve medical quality and reduce medical costs. This study examined the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Difficult Doctor-Patient Relationship Questionnaire (DDPRQ-10) among general hospital inpatients in China.
methodsThe research recruited 38 resident doctors responsible for 120 participants, and factor analyses were used to assess the construct validity of the scale. Convergent validity was evaluated by examining the correlation between DDPRQ-10 and depressive symptoms, burnout, and self-efficacy, using the Patient Health Questionnaire Depression Scale-9 item (PHQ-9), and the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). Both multidimensional item response theory (MIRT) and unidimensional item response theory (IRT) frameworks were used to estimate the parameters of each item.
resultsThe Chinese version of DDPRQ-10 showed satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.931), and fitted in a modified two-factor model of positive feelings and negative feelings (χ2/df = 1.494, GFI = 0.925, RMSEA = 0.071, SRMR = 0.008, CFI = 0.985, NFI = 0.958, NNFI = 0.980, TLI = 0.980, IFI = 0.986). Significant correlations with PHQ-9 with DDPRQ-10 and both subscales were revealed (r = 0.293 ~ 0.333, p < .001), while DDPRQ-10 score also significantly correlated with doctors' MBI score (r = -0.467, p < .001). The MIRT model of full scale and IRT models of both subscales showed high discrimination of all items (a = 2.30 ~ 10.18), and the test information within the range of low-quality relationship was relatively high.
conclusionThe Chinese version of DDPRQ-10 displayed satisfactory reliability and validity and thus was appropriate for measuring the DPR in Chinese medical settings.
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.