ArticlePEC innovation2025
Development and evaluation of the patient engagement questionnaire (PEQ).
Article in PEC innovation, 2025. 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
Abstract
Objective: We sought to develop and evaluate the Patient Engagement Questionnaire (PEQ); a brief, remote assessment that captures both measures of health literacy and patient activation in the context of engagement in healthcare. Methods: Participants in the COVID-19 & Chronic Conditions cohort study completed a survey that included PEQ items, demographics, Newest Vital Sign, Consumer Health Activation Index, and patient-reported outcomes. Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis were used to conduct an item reduction process and assess fit. Spearman correlations and generalized linear regression models were performed to assess convergent and predictive validity. Stratum-specific likelihood ratios were used to determine cutoffs. Results: 630 participants completed the survey. PEQ had 6 items loading onto one single factor, with good reliability (α = 0.76), and convergent validity with the NVS ( Conclusion: The PEQ is a brief and easily administered tool designed to capture the intersect between health literacy and activation. Practice implications: The PEQ will help identify patients struggling with care engagement, aiding resource allocation to those most in need.
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.