ArticleBMJ open2025
Translation and validation of the Malay Patient Measure of Safety-10 (M-PMOS-10) to enhance patient safety in Malaysia: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
- Psychometric properties of the 11-item Trust in the Medical Profession scale (TIMP) Malay version.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to translate and validate the Malay version of the Patient Measure of Safety-10 (M-PMOS-10) for use in Malaysian healthcare settings. The study also sought to establish its content and face validity to ensure cultural relevance, psychometric validity and reliability in assessing patient perceptions of safety.
designA cross-sectional validation study.
settingThe study was conducted in tertiary-level care at a teaching hospital in Kelantan, Malaysia.
participants30 hospitalised patients participated in face validity assessment, while another 100 patients were involved in confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for construct validation. Eligible participants were adults aged 18-60, fluent in Malay, clinically stable and without a formally diagnosed psychiatric illness. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the psychometric validation of the M-PMOS-10, assessed through CFA and internal consistency reliability (Raykov's rho). Content validity was determined using expert evaluations, and face validity was assessed through cognitive interviews with patients. Secondary outcomes included descriptive statistics of patient safety perceptions.
resultsThe M-PMOS-10 demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Raykov's rho=0.929) and strong factor loadings (majority >0.70). CFA supported a revised single-factor structure (Comparative Fit Index=0.986, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation=0.067). Scale-Level Content Validity Index/Average method (Ave) (0.96) confirmed the relevance of the translated items, while Scale-Level Face Validity Index/Ave (0.87) indicated that patients found the questionnaire items clear and comprehensible. The mean total M-PMOS-10 score was 42.98 (SD=6.14), indicating positive patient safety perceptions, though communication regarding care plans showed room for improvement.
conclusionsThe validated M-PMOS-10 is a reliable and culturally appropriate tool for assessing patient safety perceptions in Malaysia. Its strong content and face validity reinforce its utility in patient safety research and clinical applications. Implementing this tool can help healthcare institutions identify safety gaps, refine staff training and improve communication strategies. Future studies should explore its applicability in different healthcare settings and assess its responsiveness to interventions to enhance patient safety.
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.