ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Validation of the Chinese Patient Participation Scale (PPS-C) in Internal Medicine Patient: A Psychometric Study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To translate the Patient Participation Scale (PPS) into Chinese and evaluate its psychometric properties among internal medicine patients in a tertiary hospital in China, providing a reliable tool for enhancing patient participation in healthcare decisions. Background: Patient participation is critical for patient-centered care, widely proven to enhance healthcare quality and improve health outcomes. While China increasingly recognizes the importance of patient participation in clinical decision-making, evidence-based interventions remain limited, partly due to the lack of validated measurement tools. The original PPS has demonstrated promise in assessing patient participation, but its application in China requires cultural adaptation to ensure conceptual and linguistic equivalence. Design: A cross-sectional study. Methods: The Brislin's translation model was followed to translate the PPS. A convenience sample of 457 internal medicine patients in a tertiary hospital was recruited. Validity was calculated by content validity, construct validity, concurrent validity, and convergence validity. Reliability was analyzed through internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability. Results: The content validity index was 0.914. The confirmatory factor analysis indicated a significantly good fit for a four-factor model (χ Conclusion: The PPS-C has good reliability and validity, which can be applied to the assessment of the participation levels of internal medicine patients in China.
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.