ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
Development and Psychometric Test of the Inpatients Experiences Measurement Scale (IEMS).
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceived satisfaction in fetal therapy: proposal and pilot of a novel assessment tool (FETAL Surgery Global Satisfaction).BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence and academic writing questionnaire (AI-AWQ): development and validation among medical students' experiences using exploratory factor analysis.BMC medical education · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: In South Korea, hospitalized patients' experiences significantly impact satisfaction and treatment outcomes. This study developed and evaluated the Inpatients Experience Measurement Scale (IEMS) for its psychometric properties. Patients and Methods: Participants from three hospitals were recruited using convenience sampling. Scale item generation involved patient interviews and a Delphi survey with experts. Psychometric testing used Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) with 150 participants and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) with 151 participants. Results: A total of 301 patients participated, resulting in a 20-item scale across four factors: "Care Quality and Information Provision", "Patient Safety and Dietary Services", "Facility and Comfort Infrastructure", and "Comprehensive Patient Support Services". Rated on a 5-point Likert scale, the scale showed a high Content Validity Index (CVI) over 0.80. EFA explained 61.43% of the variance. The four-factor model was validated using CFA with favorable fit indices. The IEMS demonstrated strong convergent validity, supported by high composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE) values. Significant correlations with the Patient Satisfaction Scale reinforced its convergent validity. Discriminant validity was confirmed, and all reliability measures exceeded the minimum threshold of 0.80. Conclusion: The IEMS effectively captures inpatients' experiences, demonstrating robust reliability and validity. This scale is a valuable tool for assessing patient experiences, facilitating enhancements in patient care and satisfaction within hospital 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.