MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321169596 · doi:10.1111/hex.13728

Development and psychometric properties of a short version of the Patient Continuity of Care Questionnaire

2023· article· en· W4321169596 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Säfström, Kristofer Årestedt, Heather D. Hadjistavropoulos, Maria Liljeroos, Lena Nordgren, Tiny Jaarsma, Anna Strömberg

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Expectations · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersMedical Research CouncilUppsala UniversitetForskningsrådet i Sydöstra Sverige
KeywordsRasch modelCronbach's alphaContent validityPsychometricsHealth careMedicineContinuity of carePatient satisfactionPsychologyClinical psychologyNursingDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Hospitalization due to cardiac conditions is increasing worldwide, and follow-up after hospitalization usually occurs in a different healthcare setting than the one providing treatment during hospitalization. This leads to a risk of fragmented care and increases the need for coordination and continuity of care after hospitalization. Furthermore, international reports highlight the importance of improving continuity of care and state that it is an essential indicator of the quality of care. Patients' perceptions of continuity of care can be evaluated using the Patient Continuity of Care Questionnaire (PCCQ). However, the original version is extensive and may prove burdensome to complete; therefore, we aimed to develop and evaluate a short version of the PCCQ. METHODS: This was a psychometric validation study. Content validity was evaluated among user groups, including patients (n = 7), healthcare personnel (n = 15), and researchers (n = 7). Based on the results of the content validity and conceptual discussions among the authors, 12 items were included in the short version. Data from patients were collected using a consecutive sampling procedure involving patients 6 weeks after hospitalization due to cardiac conditions. Rasch analysis was used to evaluate the psychometric properties of the short version of the PCCQ. RESULTS: A total of 1000 patients were included [mean age 72 (SD = 10), 66% males]. The PCCQ-12 presented a satisfactory overall model fit and a person separation index of 0.79 (Cronbach's α: .91, ordinal α: .94). However, three items presented individual item misfits. No evidence of multidimensionality was found, meaning that a total score can be calculated. A total of four items presented evidence of response dependence but, according to the analysis, this did not seem to affect the measurement properties or reliability of the PCCQ-12. We found that the first two response options were disordered in all items. However, the reliability remained the same when these response options were amended. In future research, the benefits of the four response options could be evaluated. CONCLUSION: The PCCQ-12 has sound psychometric properties and is ready to be used in clinical and research settings to measure patients' perceptions of continuity of care after hospitalization. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients, healthcare personnel and researchers were involved in the study because they were invited to select items relevant to the short version of the questionnaire.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.459
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth ExpectationsSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207