Is the <scp>G</scp>ive <scp>Y</scp>outh a <scp>V</scp>oice questionnaire an appropriate measure of teen‐centred care in paediatric oncology: a <scp>R</scp>asch measurement theory analysis

Klassen, Anne F.; Cano, Stefan; Sinha, Roona; Shahbaz, Ali; Klaassen, Robert J.; Dix, David

doi:10.1111/hex.12161

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The 13-item measure (Cronbach’s α = 0.88) examines three dimensions of the patient-provider relationship: Supporting Independence (6 items; Range: 0–24; Cronbach’s α = .89; Example item: Talk to you honestly), Family-Centered Communication (4 items; Range: 0–16; Cronbach’s α = .73; Example item: Give you and your parent(s) written information about your treatment), and Respectful Relationships (3 items; Range: 0–12; Cronbach’s α = .66; Example item: Treat you as an individual). Items were chosen from the Give Youth a Voice (GYV) questionnaire [27] and the Measure of Processes of Care (MPOC-20) scale [28]. Items from the MPOC-20 were modified to elicit the adolescents’ perspective as the measure was originally created for use with parents, and the response options were modified from a 7-point scale to a 4-point Likert scale (1=Never, 2=Sometimes, 3=Most of the time, and 4=All the time; participants were also able to select “Does Not Apply to Me”) based on feedback gathered in pilot testing with 4 adolescents (ages 10–17 years).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Items from the MPOC-20 were modified to elicit the adolescents’ perspective as the measure was originally created for use with parents, and the response options were modified from a 7-point scale to a 4-point Likert scale (1=Never, 2=Sometimes, 3=Most of the time, and 4=All the time; participants were also able to select “Does Not Apply to Me”) based on feedback gathered in pilot testing with 4 adolescents (ages 10–17 years). Scores for each subscale were summed across items in each subscale (Does Not Apply to Me was given a score of 0 [27]), with higher scores indicating higher presence of these dimensions in the patient-provider relationship.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adolescent cancer patients’ perceived quality of cancer care: The roles of patient engagement and supporting independence

Siembida

Kadan‐Lottick

Moss

et al. 2018

Patient Education and Counseling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adolescent cancer patients’ perceived quality of cancer care: The roles of patient engagement and supporting independence

Siembida

Kadan‐Lottick

Moss

et al. 2018

Patient Education and Counseling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is clear that responses to Likert scale provide merely ordinal level data ( 10 , 11 ). Modern test theory, including the Rasch model for measurement, was introduced to address potential problems related to the routine use of summary scores that do not take into account the relative importance to patients of the different items comprising any scale ( 12 , 13 ). Although Rasch analysis was developed initially to analyze reading, intelligence, and achievement tests, recently its use has been extended to other areas, such as health-related quality of life and the measurement of patient health-care experience ( 14 – 16 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking Through the Patients’ Eyes

Carretta

Bond

Cappiello

et al. 2017

Journal of Patient Experience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:Patient satisfaction is a personal evaluation of health-care services that is often used as an indicator of quality of care. The aim of this study was to identify aspects of hospital care that affect patient satisfaction by examining the structural and convergent validity of an in-house questionnaire.Methods:The sample consisted of 3320 patients discharged from an Italian public hospital. The questionnaire included items exploring communication with nurses and physicians, pain management, quality of accommodation, and discharge information. Data were analyzed using the Rasch model.Results:From the patients’ perspective, the number of response options was excessive and the questionnaire proved to have both medical and accommodation dimensions. Patients, on average, gave higher satisfaction scores to the medical dimension over the accommodation dimension. Higher satisfaction was associated with kindness and courtesy of the nursing staff, doctors’ courtesy, and the quality of bed linen.Conclusion:The results support the administration of the questionnaire but suggest change in the hospital’s analytical procedures in order to match the drivers of satisfaction as seen by the patients.

show abstract

“…21 In this, parents and youths could well have a valuable role in providing valid data. [22][23][24] Ideally, disability is capability and difficulties matched against task requirements. And mismatch equals disability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parents’ Assessments of Disability in Their Children Using World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, Child and Youth Version Joined Body Functions and Activity Codes Related to Everyday Life

Illum

Gradel

2017

Clin Med Insights Pediatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIMTo help parents assess disability in their own children using World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, Child and Youth Version (ICF-CY) code qualifier scoring and to assess the validity and reliability of the data sets obtained.METHODParents of 162 children with spina bifida, spinal muscular atrophy, muscular disorders, cerebral palsy, visual impairment, hearing impairment, mental disability, or disability following brain tumours performed scoring for 26 body functions qualifiers (b codes) and activities and participation qualifiers (d codes). Scoring was repeated after 6 months. Psychometric and Rasch data analysis was undertaken.RESULTSThe initial and repeated data had Cronbach α of 0.96 and 0.97, respectively. Inter-code correlation was 0.54 (range: 0.23-0.91) and 0.76 (range: 0.20-0.92). The corrected code-total correlations were 0.72 (range: 0.49-0.83) and 0.75 (range: 0.50-0.87). When repeated, the ICF-CY code qualifier scoring showed a correlation R of 0.90. Rasch analysis of the selected ICF-CY code data demonstrated a mean measure of 0.00 and 0.00, respectively. Code qualifier infit mean square (MNSQ) had a mean of 1.01 and 1.00. The mean corresponding outfit MNSQ was 1.05 and 1.01. The ICF-CY code τ thresholds and category measures were continuous when assessed and reassessed by parents. Participating children had a mean of 56 codes scores (range: 26-130) before and a mean of 55.9 scores (range: 25-125) after repeat. Corresponding measures were −1.10 (range: −5.31 to 5.25) and −1.11 (range: −5.42 to 5.36), respectively. Based on measures obtained at the 2 occasions, the correlation coefficient R was 0.84. The child code map showed coherence of ICF-CY codes at each level. There was continuity in covering the range across disabilities. And, first and foremost, the distribution of codes reflexed a true continuity in disability with codes for motor functions activated first, then codes for cognitive functions, and, finally, codes for more complex functions.CONCLUSIONSParents can assess their own children in a valid and reliable way, and if the WHO ICF-CY second-level code data set is functioning in a clinically sound way, it can be employed as a tool for identifying the severity of disabilities and for monitoring changes in those disabilities over time. The ICF-CY codes selected in this study might be one cornerstone in forming a national or even international generic set of ICF-CY codes for the benefit of children with disabilities, their parents, and caregivers and for the whole community supporting with children with disabilities on a daily and perpetual basis.

show abstract

Is the Give Youth a Voice questionnaire an appropriate measure of teen‐centred care in paediatric oncology: a Rasch measurement theory analysis

Abstract: Background Adolescents have their own views about the cancer care they receive and how they feel they are treated, but their opinions are rarely solicited.

Cited by 3 publications

References 26 publications

Adolescent cancer patients’ perceived quality of cancer care: The roles of patient engagement and supporting independence

Adolescent cancer patients’ perceived quality of cancer care: The roles of patient engagement and supporting independence

Looking Through the Patients’ Eyes

Parents’ Assessments of Disability in Their Children Using World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, Child and Youth Version Joined Body Functions and Activity Codes Related to Everyday Life

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About