ArticleHealth promotion international2026
Developing a patient reported measure on out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure among Aboriginal patients: a formative study.
Article in Health promotion international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Equity, evidence and indigenous knowledges in PROMs in Australian injury research: a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Healthcare costs not subsidized by the government and are covered by patients, are known as out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure (OOPHE). In Australia, OOPHE disproportionately impacts Aboriginal households, particularly in rural and remote regions. Currently no patient reported measures (PRM) to assess OOPHE exist, despite being an identified priority in Aboriginal communities. This study developed and psychometrically evaluated (validity and test-retest reliability) of an OOPHE PRM for Aboriginal households in outer regional to remote areas. This Aboriginal led study was governed by an Aboriginal Governance Group, which involved a 4-stage process: (i) identification of community-derived OOPHE themes; (ii) item development and expert judgment quantification; (iii) exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to determine factor structure through pilot testing with Aboriginal participants; and (iv) assessment of reliability and stability through test-retest methods. Stage 1 identified OOPHE themes (i.e. barriers, financial strain), informing development of a 15 item PRM in Stage 2. In Stage 3, 39 Aboriginal participants completed Test 1, with EFA revealing a two-factor model; Factor 1 (8 items, internal consistency = 0.91) and Factor 2 (6 items, internal consistency = 0.85). In Stage 4, 32 participants completed Test 2, with over 60% of items showing substantial to perfect agreement (κ = 0.61-0.87) and scale-level reliability as good to excellent (ICC = 0.75-0.92). Two items performed poorly and were removed, resulting in a final 13-item PRM. The OOPHE PRM demonstrates promising psychometric properties as a culturally grounded measure of OOPHE burden among Aboriginal families, supporting advocacy for equitable policy, funding, and health system reform.
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.