Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40700682›Full record

ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025

Psychometric Evaluation of the Patient Experience Colonoscopy Scale.

Annica Rosvall, Malin Axelsson, Magdalena Annersten Gershater, Ervin Toth, Karl Bang Christensen, Christine Kumlien

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Annica RosvallDepartment of Care Science, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-1213-5618
Malin AxelssonDepartment of Care Science, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
Magdalena Annersten GershaterDepartment of Care Science, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
Ervin TothDepartment of Gastroenterology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Karl Bang ChristensenSection of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Christine KumlienDepartment of Care Science, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.

Funding

The Derbring and Stöltens Research and Development Foundation from Malmö Nurses Association provided the funding necessary for the design and printing of the paper survey as well as patient information.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE, AIMS AND

objectivesColonoscopy, though common, can be uncomfortable, necessitating routine assessment of patient experience per European guidelines. Positive patient experiences are crucial as they influence willingness for repeat procedures. Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) effectively capture patient perspectives through surveys, empowering patients to influence healthcare quality. These surveys identify areas for improvement and inform research, enhancing healthcare and its quality. The Patient Experience Colonoscopy Scale (PECS) is a colonoscopy-specific PREM that measures adult patient experience after an elective colonoscopy. It consists of items derived from the patient's perspective and has been found to be content valid. The PECS is multidimensional and divided into five constructs: health motivation, discomfort, information, a caring relationship, and understanding. The current study aims to evaluate the measurement properties of the new PREM, called the PECS regarding reliability and construct validity.

methodThe sample comprised 331 adult patients who had undergone an elective colonoscopy at a University Hospital in Sweden. The PECS was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients, confirmatory factor analysis, and multi- and unidimensional Rasch analyses.

resultsThe test-retest reliability was acceptable, with an average intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.72. Construct validity was tested with three different techniques. The confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the theoretical bifactor model containing the five constructs was supported. The multi- and unidimensional Rasch analyses showed that approximately 60% of the items had acceptable values. Some violation of local independence and some evidence of differential item functioning with respect to age and gender were identified, but they all made subject matter sense. The PECS is well-targeted to patients with less positive experiences. The overall evaluation of the construct validity showed the PECS has acceptable measurement properties.

conclusionThe PECS is a reliable and valid 30-item colonoscopy-specific PREM that can play an important role in gathering data for research and quality improvement initiatives that seek to incorporate patient perspectives on colonoscopy experiences. Some potential areas for improvement were found, but the PECS is ready to be utilised in clinical practice for the purpose of collecting patient experiences.

Indexed as

ColonoscopyPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPatient SatisfactionPsychometricsAdultAgedFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesSwedencolonoscopyconstruct validitypatientspsychometricsreliabilitysurveys and questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID40700682
PMCPMC12286594

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.