ArticleZdravstveno varstvo2025
Cultural Adaptation of Patient-Reported Indicator Surveys (PaRIS) Patient and Primary Care Practice Questionnaires to the Slovenian Context.
Article in Zdravstveno varstvo, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patient Safety in Family Medicine through the Eyes of People with Chronic Conditions in Slovenia.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The objective of the study is to describe the adaptation process (with emphasis on cognitive testing) of the Slovenian version of the PaRIS international survey, including two questionnaires to assess patient-reported health outcomes and the experiences of adults living with one or more chronic conditions managed in primary care settings: (1) Patient questionnaire (targets patients aged 45 and older) and (2) Provider questionnaire (targets health care providers working in primary care). Methods: The translation process of both PaRIS questionnaires followed a team-based double translation and reconciliation approach. Cognitive interviewing with 29 participants was performed. An analysis grid and debriefing were implemented, and the cognitive testing rating was assessed for each tested question. Cross-national error source typology (CNEST) was used. Results: The results of cognitive interviewing revealed difficulties in 30 questions / segments (out of a total of 44 tested) in the Patient questionnaire and difficulties in 23 questions / segments (out of a total of 24 tested) in the Provider questionnaire. In both questionnaires most difficulties were identified as poor source question design. Conclusions: Our study showed that cognitive interviewing is a crucial step in questionnaire adaptation, especially while transferring internationally developed questionnaires on Patient Reported Experience Measures and Patient Reported Outcome Measures into different national contexts. Through a rigorous process of translation and cognitive testing, we obtained better quality PREMs and PROMs measures in the Slovenian language. However, the measurement tools need to be piloted, and psychometrically evaluated in future to test reliability and validity.
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.