MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160955295 · doi:10.1097/pts.0000000000000862

Construction of a Scale Assessing Patients’ Perceptions Regarding Sanitation and Hygiene in a Clinical Setting

2021· article· en· W3160955295 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Patient Safety · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth Education and Validation
Canadian institutionsNiagara College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSanitationHygieneScale (ratio)Measure (data warehouse)PerceptionHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study attempted to develop a scale, hereby called HYGIENICCARE, that assesses patients' perceptions regarding sanitation and hygiene in a healthcare environment. It also evaluated the relationship between the new measure and a previously validated scale measuring healthcare quality. METHODS: This study was a psychometric test in which we constructed a new survey and administered the survey to patients in wards and the outpatient departments of 5 hospitals in Accra North. A robust procedure, including a review of selected questions by an expert panel, was followed to determine the original bank of items of the instrument. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was used to select items for the scale, whereas confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess construct validity. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the association between the new scale and an existing measure of healthcare quality. RESULTS: A bank of 10 items was determined through a systematic review of the literature and the engagement of 7 expert reviewers. Through principal component analysis, the items were reduced to 9. Principal component analysis yielded 2 factors: "environment and equipment" and "personnel and process," which both explained 82% of the total variance and produced Cronbach α coefficients of 0.912 and 0.86, respectively. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the 2-factor solution and produced satisfactory discriminant validity and convergent validity indicators. The 2 domains of the new scale were highly correlated with all dimensions of a scale measuring healthcare quality called HEALTHQUAL (r ≥ 0.76, P < 0.001). In multiple linear regression, each of the 2 domains of HYGIENICCARE explained a total variance of 41% or greater in all domains of HEALTHQUAL (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a brief scale measuring hospital hygiene and sanitation that correlated well with an existing measure of healthcare quality. This effort shows that the new tool is a valid measure of patient-perceived hospital hygiene and sanitation.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.381 · 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