MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995699059 · doi:10.1097/ncq.0000000000000452

Psychometric Testing of a Patient Empowerment, Engagement, and Activation Survey

2019· article· en· W2995699059 on OpenAlexaff
Jaynelle F. Stichler, Luc R. Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Care Quality · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsCARE Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaEmpowermentPsychologyScale (ratio)Variance (accounting)PsychometricsClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patient or person-centered care has become a widely used philosophical framework and yet has varying definitions and characteristics. Person-centered care has recently been conceptualized as patient empowerment, engagement, and activation with studies citing positive outcomes. PURPOSE: This study reports the psychometric properties of the Patient Empowerment, Engagement, and Activation Survey. METHODS: An instrument development and testing approach was used. RESULTS: A 21-item survey was developed demonstrating respectable Cronbach α coefficients for the total scale (α = 0.88) and for each subscale: Empowerment (α = 0.71), Engagement (α = 0.81), and Activation (α = 0.76). A regression analysis with 1 item, "I am ready to be discharged" as the dependent variable and all other items as independent variables explained 65% of the variance in readiness for discharge (P < .001). DISCUSSION: The Patient Empowerment, Engagement, and Activation Survey can be used to evaluate patients' perspectives of care quality (empowerment and engagement) and readiness for discharge (activation).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.129
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Care QualitySame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207