ArticlePloS one2026
Translation, cultural adaptation, and psychometric evaluation of the Patient Assessment Chronic Illness Care tool in Ethiopia (PACIC-5As-ET) for patients with type 2 diabetes.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChronic conditions are a significant global health challenge that adversely affects the quality of care for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). To evaluate and improve the quality of care, the Patient Assessment Chronic Illness Care (PACIC-5As) tool has been developed. It is the most widely used tool designed to assess the perceived quality of care among individuals with chronic conditions, including diabetes. Nevertheless, it has not yet been culturally adapted and validated in the Ethiopian context. Therefore, this study aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and evaluate the psychometric properties of the PACIC-5As tool in Ethiopia.
methodsA multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted among individuals with type 2 diabetes from March 24, 2025, to May 5, 2025, in the Amhara region's comprehensive specialized referral hospitals. A systematic random sampling technique was used to select the study participants. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews. The tool consists of 26 items and 5 domains. Content validity was assessed at both the individual and scale levels. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha (α) and composite reliability (CR), with a value ≥ 0.70 considered acceptable. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to evaluate model fit and factor structure. Model fit was assessed using the absolute and incremental fit indices and interpreted based on the recommended thresholds. Convergent validity was computed using average variance extracted (AVE), with a value ≥ 0.4 considered adequate, while discriminant validity was evaluated using AVE and inter-construct correlations.
resultsA total of 520 study participants were enrolled, and 517 (99.4%) were included in the study. The overall mean summary score of PACIC-5As-ET was 2.68 (±0.62). The content validity index at the item and scale levels ranged from 80% to 100%, with an inter-rater agreement of 95%. The Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability (CR) of the PACIC-5As-ET were 0.93. The Cronbach's alpha values for the subscales ranged from 0.71 (Assist) to 0.82 (Arrange). The test-retest reliability of PACIC-5As-ET was 0.94. The model fit indices were χ²/df (2.79), RMSEA (0.06), SRMR (0.08), GFI (0.89), and CFI (0.40). The AVE value of the overall PACIC-5As-ET was 0.93, and the subscales ranged from 0.47 (Advise) to 0.59 (Arrange).
conclusionsThe Amharic version of the PACIC-5As-ET tool demonstrated excellent internal consistency and acceptable validity for assessing the perceptions of patients with T2D. The absolute fit indices were generally within the recommended range, whereas the incremental fit indices were low. Therefore, support for the hypothesized five-factor structure is limited and should be interpreted with caution.
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.