ArticleJournal of Appalachian health2024
Check with the Intended Audience First! Content Validation as a Method for Inclusive Research for Primary Care Engagement in Rural Appalachia.
Article in Journal of Appalachian health, 2024. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: To date, referral practices based on social determinants of health (SDOH) among primary care providers (PCPs) and clinic staff in rural regions, including Appalachian North Carolina (NC), are not well understood. Purpose: This study aims to develop and content validate a primary care engagement (PCE) survey to assess (1) engagement and burnout; (2) referral practices; and (3) self-efficacy and confidence in making referrals based on SDOH among PCPs and clinic staff in Appalachian NC. Methods: Using the Social-Ecological Model as a theoretical framework, researchers developed a 37-item PCE survey. Content validation was completed by a panel of experts recruited from a convenience sample of faculty at a local university and PCPs and clinic staff practicing in Appalachian NC. Participants rated the degree of relevance of survey questions on a four-point Likert scale and provided additional feedback about the wording/appropriateness for the intended audience. Content validity index (CVI) scores were calculated for each question by averaging the degree of relevance ratings. Results: Ten participants completed the study between August and November 2022 (nurse practitioners, academic researchers, clinical support staff/quality improvement associates, administrative staff supervisor, administrator/practice manager). CVI scores for each item ranged from 3.43 to 4.0. Comments regarding potential improvements were primarily focused on small edits, including grammar-related changes and opportunities for clarity and inclusivity. Implications: High CVI ratings for all survey items indicate the overall approach/survey aim resonates with local clinicians and individuals with expertise in SDOH. This study and the final survey lay the foundation for collaborative, collective-impact initiatives that are directly informed by the survey findings.
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.