| Title |
The Universal Patient Centeredness Questionnaire: reliability and validity of a one-page questionnaire following surveys in three patient populations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient related outcome measures, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/prom.s102732 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Oyvind Bjertnaes, Hilde Hestad Iversen, Olaf Holmboe, Kirsten Danielsen, Andrew Garratt |
| Abstract |
This study developed and tested the reliability and validity of the Universal Patient Centeredness Questionnaire (UPC-Q). The UPC-Q developed in this study has three parts: 1) the aspects that patients consider the most important when receiving a relevant health care service, rating the health care services on these aspects and their prioritization, 2) the overall experiences of patients using the relevant health care service, and 3) suggestions for improvements. The UPC-Q was tested in four different patient-experience surveys in 2015, including psychiatric inpatients (n=109), general practitioner (GP) patients (n=1,059), and inpatients from two hospital samples (n=973, n=599). The UPC-Q was tested for item completeness and ceiling effects, while the UPC-Q scale consisting of the first part of the UPC-Q was tested for internal consistency reliability and construct validity. The percentage of patients rating at least one aspect was 70.6% for psychiatric inpatients, 77.6% for hospital inpatients, and 90.6% for GP patients, while 88.9% of the psychiatric inpatients, 93.1% of the hospital inpatients, and 95.3% of the GP patients were able to prioritize the aspects. The internal consistency reliability of the UPC-Q scale was acceptable in all samples (Cronbach's alpha >0.7), and construct validity was supported by 20 of 21 significant associations between the UPC-Q and related variables. The UPC-Q total score was skewed toward positive evaluations, but the ceiling effect was smaller for an unbalanced response scale than for a balanced scale. The UPC-Q includes ratings of what is most important for individual patients, while at the same time providing data for improving the quality of health care and making it possible to monitor trends within and across patient populations. This study included psychiatric inpatients, hospital inpatients, and GP patients, and found that the UPC-Q performed well in terms of acceptance, internal consistency reliability, and construct validity. |
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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Iceland | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 43% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
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 07 June 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Patient related outcome measures
#152
of 196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,922
of 353,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient related outcome measures
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 353,659 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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.