Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36797976›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2023

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

Emma Safstrom, Kristofer Arestedt, Heather D Hadjistavropoulos, Maria Liljeroos, Lena Nordgren, Tiny Jaarsma, Anna Stromberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Tell Me MoreJournal of patient experience · 2024
    Article
  3. Development and psychometric properties of a short version of the Patient Continuity of Care Questionnaire.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Emma SafstromNyköping Hospital, Sörmland County Council, Nyköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-6548-1042
Kristofer ArestedtDepartment of Health and Caring Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
Heather D HadjistavropoulosDepartment of Psychology, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Maria LiljeroosDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Lena NordgrenCenter for Clinical Research Sörmland, Uppsala University, Eskilstuna, Sweden.
Tiny JaarsmaDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-4197-4026
Anna StrombergDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Linköping University · SELinnaeus University · SEUniversity of Regina · CAUppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHospitalization 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.

methodsThis 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.

resultsA 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.

conclusionThe 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.

Indexed as

Continuity of Patient CareDelivery of Health CareAgedFemaleHumansMalePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnairescontinuity of carepatient dischargepsychometricsquality of carereproducibility of resultssurveys and questionnairesvalidation studies

Identifiers

PMID36797976
PMCPMC10154813
OpenAlexW4321169596

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.