| Title |
Performance of the measures of processes of care for adults and service providers in rehabilitation settings
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient related outcome measures, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/prom.s81361 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elena L Bamm, Peter Rosenbaum, Seanne Wilkins, Paul Stratford |
| Abstract |
In recent years, client-centered care has been embraced as a new philosophy of care by many organizations around the world. Clinicians and researchers have identified the need for valid and reliable outcome measures that are easy to use to evaluate success of implementation of new concepts. The current study was developed to complete adaptation and field testing of the companion patient-reported measures of processes of care for adults (MPOC-A) and the service provider self-reflection measure of processes of care for service providers working with adult clients (MPOC-SP(A)). A validation study. In-patient rehabilitation facilities. MPOC-A and measure of processes of care for service providers working with adult clients (MPOC-SP(A)). Three hundred and eighty-four health care providers, 61 patients, and 16 family members completed the questionnaires. Good to excellent internal consistency (0.71-0.88 for health care professionals, 0.82-0.90 for patients, and 0.87-0.94 for family members), as well as moderate to good correlations between domains (0.40-0.78 for health care professionals and 0.52-0.84 for clients) supported internal reliability of the tools. Exploratory factor analysis of the MPOC-SP(A) responses supported the multidimensionality of the questionnaire. MPOC-A and MPOC-SP(A) are valid and reliable tools to assess patient and service-provider accounts, respectively, of the extent to which they experience, or are able to provide, client-centered service. Research should now be undertaken to explore in more detail the relationships between client experience and provider reports of their own behavior. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 20% |
| Researcher | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 5 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 12% |
| Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 June 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Patient related outcome measures
#152
of 196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,513
of 281,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient related outcome measures
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 196 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.