Psychometric Testing of a Patient Empowerment, Engagement, and Activation Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".