Development and psychometric properties of a short version of the Patient Continuity of Care Questionnaire
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private grant(s) and/or Sponsorship. Main funding source(s): Medical Research Council of Southeast Sweden. Center for Clinical Research Sörmland/Uppsala University Introduction Hundreds of thousands of persons are discharged from hospitalisation due to cardiac diseases every year in Europe. Follow-up after hospitalisation due to cardiac diseases usually occurs with another healthcare provider, e.g., in primary care, which is a challenge for the coordination and continuity of care. Continuity of care after hospitalisation is an essential indicator of the quality of care, and international reports highlight the importance of improving continuity of care. Patients’ perception of continuity of care can be evaluated using the Patient Continuity of Care Questionnaire (PCCQ-27 items). However, the length of the questionnaire represents a barrier to completion, and, therefore, we aimed to develop and psychometrically evaluate a short version of the PCCQ. Method This was a psychometric validation study. Content validity was first evaluated among user groups, including patients (n=7), health care professionals (n=15), and researchers (n=7). Then, based on content validity and conceptual discussions in the research group, 12 items were selected for the short version. Data were collected from patients six weeks after hospitalisation due to angina, atrial fibrillation, acute myocardial infarction, or heart failure using a consecutive sampling procedure. Measurement properties were evaluated with the Rasch Measurement Model. Results A total of 1000 patients were included (66% males, mean age 72 SD=10). The 12 items presented satisfactory overall model fit and a reliability of 0.79. Three items did not fit the model as they presented fit residuals >±2.5. The items presenting misfit were: item 12 (information on treatment after discharge), item 28 (personnel had knowledge on medical situation) and item 29 (confidence in personnel) (Table 1). Four items presented response dependence; a patients answer on item 2 (information on prognosis) seemed to depend on how the patient had answered item 1 (information on diagnosis). Also, items 28 and 29 seemed to be response dependent. Each pair of response-dependent items was combined into a larger subtest item to evaluate any impact on measurement properties. However, the changes in person location, person fit, and PSI were negligible, and no effect on the measurement properties or reliability was observed. Further, no evidence of multidimensionality was found, and a total score can be calculated. The Rasch measurement model found the thresholds between the first two response options ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘somewhat disagree’ disordered in all items (Table 1). However, we found that amending the response options did not alter the prior results regarding response dependence, dimensionality, or reliability but improved individual fit residual for items 12, 27 and 28. Conclusion The PCCQ-12 is a short, unidimensional and psychometrically sound questionnaire ready to be used to measure the perception of continuity of care after hospitalisation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».