↓ Skip to main content

Translation and validation of the PACIC+ questionnaire: the Thai version

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Translation and validation of the PACIC+ questionnaire: the Thai version
Published in
BMC Primary Care, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12875-018-0801-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Zeugfang, Anawat Wisetborisut, Chaisiri Angkurawaranon, Apinun Aramrattana, Michel Wensing, Joachim Szecsenyi, Katja Krug

Abstract

The number of patients with chronic illness is increasing worldwide. These patients usually receive care from a primary care facility. The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) is a tool that is increasingly used in several countries to measure how the patients perceive the care they receive. The goal of this validation study is to provide and validate an extended version of the tool, the PACIC+ questionnaire, in Thailand. In this observational validation study, patients with type 2 diabetes from the outpatient clinic at a university hospital in Thailand completed the PACIC+ at the clinic. For follow-up, they received the questionnaire per mail after four weeks. The Thai PACIC+ comprises 26 items, which map onto 5 subscales and a summary score related to the Chronic Care Model (CCM) and 5 subscales and a summary score related to the 5A model, a counseling model for behavioral changes. Data-analysis focused on the use of most extreme answering categories (> 15%), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), and test-retest reliability. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed for the CCM and the 5A model separately to examine the factor structure. A total of 151 patients participated. The average age of the sample was 63 ± 9 years (range 29-86 years). Fifty-three percent of the respondents were female. In the Delivery System subscale, 20% of patients reported the highest possible value; in all other subscales, relative frequencies of the most extreme categories did not exceed 15%. Cronbach's alpha per subscale varied from 0.58 to 0.81, while that of the summary scores were 0.89 and 0.91. The mean difference from the test-retest varied from - 0.06 to 0.17 across subscales. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin criterion for sampling adequacy (KMO) was good for both models as well as the Bartlett's test for sphericity p. While the factor loadings in rotated factor solution showed good concordance with the CCM, concordance was not as good for the 5A model, especially for the subscales "Assess" and "Advice". A validated Thai version of the PACIC+ is now available to measure how the patients perceive the care they receive.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 21 24%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Master 5 6%
Researcher 5 6%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 21 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 21 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 23 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 April 2019.
All research outputs
#16,728,456
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,612
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,940
of 340,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#46
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 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 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 340,393 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.