Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Person-Centred Care Assessment Tool

Cai, Le; Ma, Ke; Tang, Pingfen; Edvardsson, David; Behm, Lina; Zhang, Jie; Yang, Ji-Qun; Fu, Haiyan; Ahlström, Gerd

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031580

Cited by 6 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It was observed that 12 studies (48%) obtained α coefficients with greater distance from the central tendency (e.g., Zhong and Lou, 2013 ; Bökberg et al, 2019 ; Le et al, 2020 ). On the other hand, the studies with less weight, and consequently with a greater variation due to the size of their samples, tended to be located below the meta-analytic alpha value, suggesting a possible restriction of the variance that commonly occurs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, and closely linked to the above, the P-CAT was created as a multidimensional measure, but the predominant use of the total score implies that users worked with the assumption of unidimensionality. Indeed, in about 13 substantive studies reviewed here, the total score was preferred over the individual dimension scores identified (e.g., Rokstad et al, 2012 ; Tak et al, 2015 ; Le et al, 2020 ). Also, Martínez et al ( 2015 ) found that the multidimensional and unidimensional model were indistinguishable in their SEM fit indices, additionally with interfactor correlations >0.90.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability Generalization Study of the Person-Centered Care Assessment Tool

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The so-called Person-Centered Care (PCC) model identifies three fundamental principles: changing the focus of attention from the disease to the person, individualizing care, and promoting empowerment. The Person-Centered Care Assessment Tool (P-CAT) has gained wide acceptance as a measure of PCC in recent years due to its brevity and simplicity, as well as its ease of application and interpretation. The objective of this study is to carry out a reliability generalization meta-analysis to estimate the internal consistency of the P-CAT and analyze possible factors that may affect it, such as the year of publication, the care context, the application method, and certain sociodemographic properties of the study sample. The mean value of α for the 25 samples of the 23 studies in the meta-analysis was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.79–0.84), with high heterogeneity (squared-I = 85.83%). The only variable that had a statistically significant relationship with the reliability coefficient was the mean age of the sample. The results show that the P-CAT gives acceptably consistent scores when its use is oriented toward the description and investigation of groups, although it may be affected by variables such as the age of participants.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability Generalization Study of the Person-Centered Care Assessment Tool

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A review of this type is critical given some methodological issues that seem not to have been resolved in the P-CAT; for example, although the multidimensionality of the P-CAT was identi ed in the study that constructed it, Bru-Luna et al [22] recently stated that in adaptations of the P-CAT [16][17][18][19][20]25], the total score was used for interpretation, and multidimensionality was disregarded. Thus, the multidimensionality of the original study was apparently not replicated.…”

Section: Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Person-centered Care Assessment Tool, a focus in quality healthcare: A systematic review of psychometric properties

Bru-Luna

Vilar

Merino-Soto

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The person-centered care (PCC) approach plays a fundamental role in ensuring quality healthcare. The Person-centered Care Assessment Tool (P-CAT) is one of the shortest and simplest tools available today to measure the PCC approac. This systematic review’s objective was to conduct a systematic review of the evidence in the validation studies of the P-CAT, taking the "Standards" as a frame of reference. Methods First, a systematic literature review was conducted following the PRISMA method. Second, a systematic descriptive literature review of validity tests was conducted following the "Standards" framework. The search strategy and information sources, was made through Cochrane, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and PubMed databases were searched. Eligibility criteria and selection process, a protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022335866), and the articles had to meet inclusion criteria to be included in the systematic review. Results Empirical evidence indicated that these validations offer a high number of sources related to test content, internal structure for dimensionality and internal consistency. Moderate number of sources pertaining to internal structure in terms of test-retest reliability and for the relationship with other variables. And very low numbers of evidences for response processes, internal structure in measurement invariance terms, and test consequences. Conclusions The various validations of the P-CAT are not framed in a structured theoretical framework like the "Standards" are.This can affect clinical practice, as people's health may depend on it. The findings of this study show that validation studies continue to focus on the types of validity traditionally studied, leaving aside the interpretation of the scores in terms of their intended use.

show abstract

“…Our research team has a long record of research collaboration between the two countries [ 12 – 15 ], and during this collaboration we have found that there is a lack of research comparing the different healthcare systems regarding PC. Such comparison, though, is of importance for staff competence and the provision of evidence-based care in these multicultural countries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…International collaboration may seem to be essential to enable healthcare professionals to better respond to cultural diversity in evidence-based practice [ 28 ]. The previous sparse research and the research group’s longstanding collaboration in practice and research [ 12 – 15 ] is the background to mapping the knowledge of PC for older people in China and Sweden. Therefore, the aim of this systematic scoping review was to identify the characteristics of the body of literature and to examine the knowledge gaps concerning PC research for older people (> 60 years) in two healthcare systems and cultures, mainland China and Sweden.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Similarities and differences between China and Sweden regarding the core features of palliative care for people aged 60 or older: a systematic scoping review

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Despite the increasing longevity of the world’s population, with an unprecedented rise in the number of people who need palliative care (PC), there has been sparse research regarding palliative care for older people, especially when it comes to comparison of PC between healthcare systems and cultures. The aim of this systematic scoping review was to identify the characteristics of the body of literature and to examine the knowledge gaps concerning PC research for older people (> 60 years) in two healthcare systems and cultures, mainland China and Sweden. Methods The guidelines PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews), and PICOS (Patient/population, Intervention, Comparison/control, and Outcome) were used. Empirical studies on patients 60 years or older, next of kin or staff participating in a palliative care intervention or setting were included. They were conducted in mainland China or in Sweden during 2007–2019, were published in English and were extracted from seven databases: Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Cinahl, PsycInfo, Academic Search Complete and Cochrane Library. Two independent researchers conducted the selection of studies, data extraction and methodological evaluation. Any disagreements were resolved in consultation with a third researcher. The analysis was manifest directed content analysis based on PICOS domains. Results Of the 15 studies, four were from mainland China and 11 from Sweden. Both countries included older patients with cancer but also other end-stage diseases such as heart failure and dementia. The studies differed in design, method and the content of the interventions. The study in China based on traditional Chinese medicine concerns traditional Chinese folk music. The six qualitative studies from Sweden were evaluations of five interventions. Conclusions Despite the high age of the participating patients, there was no focus on an ageing perspective concerning palliative care. To adapt to the changes taking place in most societies, future research should have increased focus on older persons’ need for palliative care and should take account of issues concerning research ethics, ethnicity and culture. Registered in Prospero CRD42020078685, available from.

show abstract

Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Person-Centred Care Assessment Tool

Cited by 6 publications

References 38 publications

Reliability Generalization Study of the Person-Centered Care Assessment Tool

Reliability Generalization Study of the Person-Centered Care Assessment Tool

Person-centered Care Assessment Tool, a focus in quality healthcare: A systematic review of psychometric properties

Similarities and differences between China and Sweden regarding the core features of palliative care for people aged 60 or older: a systematic scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About