Dataset Information

Development and validation of the Person-Centeredness of Research Scale.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Person-centeredness shifts the focus of healthcare and research to the needs and priorities of patients and communities, and may improve health outcomes. There are no instruments available, however, with which we can assess the degree to which research is indeed person-centered. Our aim was to develop and validate a quantitative instrument to rate person-centeredness of research.

Materials & methods

Scale development and validation entailed a multistep approach that led to the seven-item Person Centeredness of Research Scale (PCoR Scale) that uses a 5-point Likert rating scale. The scale was validated using ratings of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute-funded research abstracts or abstracts submitted to a translational science meeting.

Results

Psychometric properties of the PCoR Scale showed high internal consistency (? = 0.96). All seven items were highly correlated with the total score (rs range from 0.63 to 0.90). An exploratory factor analysis demonstrated that all of the items loaded on a single factor, explaining 80% of the variance. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute-funded research abstracts had a mean PCoR Scale score of 6.52 (±8.01) that was significantly higher than the abstracts submitted to the translational science meeting (-2.56 (±9.18); t = 8.09; p < 0.0001). Inter-rater reliability in the validation of the revised instrument was high (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient [ICC]_(group1) = 0.89; ICC_(group2) = 0.95).

Conclusion

This brief, quantitative rating scale is the first to assess the main constructs that describe person-centeredness of research products. The PCoR Scale can be used to assess person-centeredness in research products; for example, by funders evaluating proposals, data networks evaluating data requests or researchers evaluating their research designs.

SUBMITTER: Wilkins CH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6615408 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development and validation of the Person-Centeredness of Research Scale.

Wilkins Consuelo H CH Villalta-Gil Victoria V Houston Mckenzie M MM Joosten Yvonne Y Richmond Alan A Vaughn Yolanda C YC Stallings Sarah C SC Wallston Kenneth A KA

Journal of comparative effectiveness research 20181109 12

<h4>Aim</h4>Person-centeredness shifts the focus of healthcare and research to the needs and priorities of patients and communities, and may improve health outcomes. There are no instruments available, however, with which we can assess the degree to which research is indeed person-centered. Our aim was to develop and validate a quantitative instrument to rate person-centeredness of research.<h4>Materials & methods</h4>Scale development and validation entailed a multistep approach that led to the ...[more]

PMID: 30411976

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundQuality standards are important for improving health care by providing compelling evidence for best practice. High quality person-centered health care requires information on patients' experience of disease and of functioning in daily life.ObjectiveTo analyze and compare the content of five Swedish National Quality Registries (NQRs) and two standard sets of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) related to cardiovascular diseases.Materials and methodsAn analysis of 2588 variables (= data items) of five NQRs-the Swedish Registry of Congenital Heart Disease, Swedish Cardiac Arrest Registry, Swedish Catheter Ablation Registry, Swedish Heart Failure Registry, SWEDEHEART (including four sub-registries) and two ICHOM standard sets-the Heart Failure Standard Set and the Coronary Artery Disease Standard Set. According to the name and definition of each variable, the variables were mapped to Donabedian's quality criteria, whereby identifying whether they capture health care processes or structures or patients' health outcomes. Health outcomes were further analyzed whether they were clinician- or patient-reported and whether they capture patients' physiological functions, anatomical structures or activities and participation.ResultsIn total, 606 variables addressed process quality criteria (31%), 58 structure quality criteria (3%) and 760 outcome quality criteria (38%). Of the outcomes reported, 85% were reported by clinicians and 15% by patients. Outcome variables addressed mainly 'Body functions' (n = 392, 55%) or diseases (n = 209, 29%). Two percent of all documented data captured patients' lived experience of disease and their daily activities and participation (n = 51, 3% of all variables).ConclusionsQuality standards in the cardiovascular field focus predominately on processes (e.g. treatment) and on body functions-related outcomes. Less attention is given to patients' lived experience of disease and their daily activities and participation. The results can serve as a starting-point for harmonizing data and developing a common person-centered quality indicator set.

Project description:Researchers are finding limitations of currently available disease-focused questionnaire tools for outcome studies in complementary and alternative medicine/integrative medicine (CAM/IM).Three substudies investigated the new one-item visual analogue Arizona Integrative Outcomes Scale (AIOS), which assesses self-rated global sense of spiritual, social, mental, emotional, and physical well-being over the past 24 hours and the past month. The first study tested the scale's ability to discriminate unhealthy individuals (n = 50) from healthy individuals (n = 50) in a rehabilitation outpatient clinic sample. The second study examined the concurrent validity of the AIOS by comparing ratings of global well-being to degree of psychological distress as measured by the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) in undergraduate college students (N = 458). The third study evaluated the relationships between the AIOS and positively- and negatively-valenced tools (Positive and Negative Affect Scale and the Positive States of Mind Scale) in a different sample of undergraduate students (N = 62).Substudy (i) Rehabilitation patients scored significantly lower than the healthy controls on both forms of the AIOS and a current global health rating. The AIOS 24-hours correlated moderately and significantly with global health (patients r = 0.50; controls r = 0.45). AIOS 1-month correlations with global health were stronger within the controls (patients r = 0.36; controls r = 0.50). Controls (r = 0.64) had a higher correlation between the AIOS 24-hour and 1-month forms than did the patients (r = 0.33), which is consistent with the presumptive improvement in the patients' condition over the previous 30 days in rehabilitation. Substudy (ii) In undergraduate students, AIOS scores were inversely related to distress ratings, as measured by the global severity index on the BSI (rAIOS24h = -0.42, rAIOS1month = -0.40). Substudy (iii) AIOS scores were significantly correlated with positive affect (rAIOS24h = 0.56, rAIOS1month = 0.57) and positive states of mind (rAIOS24h = 0.42, rAIOS1month = 0.45), and inversely correlated with negative affect (rAIOS24h = -0.41, rAIOS1month = -0.59).The AIOS is able to distinguish relatively sicker from relatively healthier individuals; and correlates in expected directions with a measure of distress and indicators of positive and negative affect and positive states of mind. The AIOS offers a tool for CAM/IM research that extends beyond a disease emphasis.

Project description:BackgroundThe family environment is important for explaining individual health behaviour. While previous research mostly focused on influences among family members and dyadic interactions (parent-child), the purpose of this study was to develop a new measure, the Family Health Climate Scale (FHC-Scale), using a family-based approach. The FHC is an attribute of the whole family and describes an aspect of the family environment that is related to health and health behaviour. Specifically, a questionnaire measuring the FHC (a) for nutrition (FHC-NU) and (b) for activity behaviour (FHC-PA) was developed and validated.MethodsIn Study 1 (N=787) the FHC scales were refined and validated. The sample was randomly divided into two subsamples. With random sample I exploratory factor analyses were conducted and items were selected according to their psychometric quality. In a second step, confirmatory factor analyses were conducted using the random sample II. In Study 2 (N=210 parental couples) the construct validity was tested by correlating the FHC to self-determined motivation of healthy eating and physical activity as well as the families' food environment and joint physical activities.ResultsExploratory factor analyses with random sample I (Study 1) revealed a four (FHC-NU) and a three (FHC-PA) factor model. These models were cross-validated with random sample II and demonstrated an acceptable fit [FHC-PA: χ(2)=222.69, df=74, p<.01; χ(2)/df=3.01; CFI=.96; SRMR=.04; RMSEA=.07, CI .06/.08; FHC-NU: χ(2)=278.30, df=113, p<.01, χ(2)/df=2.46, CFI=.96; SRMR=.04; RMSEA=.06, CI .05/.07]. The perception of FHC correlated (p<.01) with the intrinsic motivation of healthy eating (r=.42) and physical activity (r=.56). Moreover, parental perceptions of FHC-NU correlated with household soft drink availability (r=-.31) and perceptions of FHC-PA with the frequency of joint physical activities with the child (r=.51). These patterns were found on the intraindividual and interindividual level.ConclusionsTwo valid instruments measuring the FHC within families were developed. The use of different informants' ratings demonstrated that the FHC is a family level variable. The results confirm the high relevance of the FHC for individuals' health behaviour. The FHC and the measurement instruments are useful for examining health-related aspects of the family environment.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough common work conditions cannot be clearly classified as positive or negative, previous challenge-hindrance demands scales have failed to address this issue.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to develop and validate scales that allow the assessment of perceived levels of challenge-hindrance demands in the nursing profession and that are in conformance with the nature of the construct.DesignThe study employed an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design, composed of two phases. Firstly, the qualitative method was employed to find out the common work environment that is typically linked to the job demands of nurses; new scales were generated following the results. Secondly, the quantitative method was employed to refine and assess the validity and reliability of the instruments.ParticipantsThe key informants for the interview were 11 registered nurses from seven private hospitals in Bangkok, Thailand. In addition, the sample of the quantitative study, consisting of 761 Thai nurses from 16 private hospitals in Bangkok was randomly divided into three parts for different analyses (i.e., exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor and reliability analysis, and nomological validity analysis).ResultsThe findings demonstrated that the assessment of the challenge-hindrance demands consists of three parts: The amount of experience with stressors, the appraisal of challenges, and the appraisal of obstacles. The analyses led to the creation of two scales: the challenge demands scale and the hindrance demands scale, each with 14 variables and four dimensions.ConclusionsThe separation of the scales into three parts made it evident that, since job demands themselves are part of an inevitably stressful work environment, hospitals have to focus on the individual interpretation of each job demand in order to manage the burnout and engagement of nurses. In addition, the scales have potential use in studies relevant to problems encountered in the nursing profession (e.g., opting to pursue a different career).

Project description:BackgroundThe needs of care based on palliative principles are stressed for all people with progressive and/or life-limiting conditions, regardless of age and the place in which care is provided. Person-centred palliative care strives to make the whole person visible and prioritizes the satisfaction of spiritual, existential, social, and psychological needs to the same extent as physical needs. However, person-centred palliative care for older persons in nursing homes seems to be sparse, possibly because staff in nursing homes do not have sufficient knowledge, skills, and training in managing symptoms and other aspects of palliative care.MethodsThis study aimed to evaluate whether an educational intervention had any effect on the staff's perception of providing person-centred palliative care for older persons in nursing homes.MethodsA knowledge-based palliative care intervention consisting of five 2-h seminars during a 6-month period was implemented at 20 nursing homes in Sweden. In total, 365 staff members were participated, 167 in the intervention group and 198 in the control group. Data were collected using two questionnaires, the Person-centred Care Assessment Tool (P-CAT) and the Person-Centred Climate Questionnaire (PCQ-S), answered before (baseline) and 3 months after (follow-up) the educational intervention was completed. Descriptive, comparative, and univariate logistical regression analyses were performed.ResultsBoth the intervention group and the control group revealed high median scores in all subscales at baseline, except for the subscale amount of organizational and environmental support in the P-CAT. The staff's high rating level of person-centred care before the intervention provides limited space for further improvements at follow-up.ConclusionThis study shows that staff perceived that managers' and the organization's amount of support to them in their everyday work was the only area for improvement in order to maintain person-centred care. The experiences among staff are crucial knowledge in understanding how palliative care can be made person-centred in spite of often limited resources in nursing homes. The dose and intensity of education activities of the intervention model need to be tested in future research to develop the most effective implementation model.Trial registrationNCT02708498 . Date of registration 26 February 2016.

Dataset Information

Development and validation of the Person-Centeredness of Research Scale.

Aim

Materials & methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Development and validation of the Person-Centeredness of Research Scale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets