ArticleJournal of primary care & community health
Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Perception of the Doctor-Patient Relationship (PREMEPA) Questionnaire in Chronic Multi-Pathological Patients.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo conduct a cross-cultural adaptation and validation in Primary Care of the PREMEPA doctor-patient relationship perception questionnaire.
designDescriptive, cross-sectional study, using self-administered questionnaires. Qualitative validation: an adapted version of the original questionnaire, was adapted to our culture. The process consisted of the evaluation, cross-cultural adaptation and consensus of a group of experts. The questionnaire was piloted on a sample of 32 patients diagnosed with at least 2 chronic pathologies. MEASURES: Cognitive piloting, comprehensibility assessment, content validation and internal consistency analysis using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Quantitative validation: the internal consistency, construct validity and validity of the questionnaire were studied by means of a confirmatory factor analysis developed in a multicenter study, randomly selecting 202 patients with at least 2 chronic pathologies.
resultsContent validity of the new Spanish version was confirmed to be adequate. Comprehensibility and internal consistency (Cronbach's α coefficient = 0.78) were adequate. The confirmatory factor analysis showed good dimensionality, factor relationship and internal consistency, as well as acceptable construct validity. The final result was a 13-item questionnaire consisting of 2 dimensions, which explain 58.5% of the variance: participation in decision-making (accounting for 45.2% of the variance) and person-centered communication (encompassing courtesy, empathy, humanity, and trust).
conclusionsThis adapted version of the PREMEPA questionnaire can be considered valid for use in the Spanish population with a history of chronic pathology. This version of PREMEPA provides a new instrument to understand and improve chronic patient care, which can improve the doctor-patient relationship, encouraging adherence to treatment and enhancing health outcomes.
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.