ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2022
Development and validation of a questionnaire to evaluate satisfaction of the patient with diabetes at the primary care level.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: To develop and validate a new instrument to measure satisfaction with integral care (doctor-nurse) of the patient with type 2 diabetes mellitus, considering expectations-experiences together for the primary level of care. Methods: The instrument was constructed with questions regarding integral care to measure the satisfaction of the diabetes patient and was classified into four domains. The validity of the content was done through a panel of experts, apparent validity through a focus group, the validity of the construct through analysis of the main components and confirmatory factorial analysis, instrument reliability with internal consistency, determined by Cronbach alpha and temporal stability (test-retest). Results: The reliability of the questionnaire was 0.942. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.849. Validity of the construct showed acceptable goodness-of-fit and factorial structure with four factors: communication, empathy, technical care, care continuity, and 24 items for each domain, giving a Kayser-Meyer-Olkin index above 0.80 and a total variance above 73. Conclusions: The instrument is reliable and is also valid in terms of up into construct and content to evaluate satisfaction. Practice Implications: In addition, these results allow to have elements for the design of strategies aimed at improving the relationship of health personnel with the patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.