Psychometric evaluation of patient assessment of chronic illness care among Korean cancer survivors
- PMID: 34383868
- PMCID: PMC8360575
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256119
Psychometric evaluation of patient assessment of chronic illness care among Korean cancer survivors
Abstract
Background: The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) was developed in the United States to assess the implementation of the Chronic Care Model (CCM)-based intervention from the patient's perspective. Although the psychometric properties of the PACIC have been reported in other chronically ill patients, it has not been reported in cancer survivors. Our aim was to evaluate the acceptability, validity, and reliability of a Korean version of the PACIC among cancer survivors (K-PACIC-CS).
Methods: Among 204 cancer survivors at a university-based hospital in South Korea, we performed psychometric evaluation of the K-PACIC-CS according to acceptability (descriptive statistics, missing values, and floor and ceiling effects), validity (confirmative factor analysis [CFA] and convergent validity), and reliability (internal consistency, i.e., Cronbach's alpha).
Results: The item response was high (missing rate = 0.5%). The floor effect was 3.9%- 43.6% and the ceiling effect was 6.9%- 41.2%. The CFA revealed good indices of fit and confirmed the five structures predetermined in the original version of PACIC. The K-PACIC-CS scores had significant positive relationships with cancer survivors' self-efficacy and health-related quality of life. The total K-PACIC-CS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = .94) and those of the subscales were acceptable (Cronbach's alpha = .76 -.86).
Conclusions: This study suggests that the K-PACIC-CS is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring implementation of CCM-based chronic care from the survivor's perspective.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Similar articles
-
Patients' assessment of chronic illness care: a validation study among patients with type 2 diabetes in Finland.BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jun 5;18(1):412. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3206-7. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018. PMID: 29871638 Free PMC article.
-
Factorial validation of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) and PACIC short version (PACIC-S) among cardiovascular disease patients in the Netherlands.Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012 Aug 31;10:104. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-10-104. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012. PMID: 22937991 Free PMC article.
-
Psychometric Evaluation of a Korean Version of the Cancer Survivors' Self-efficacy Scale.Cancer Nurs. 2019 Nov/Dec;42(6):509-514. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000691. Cancer Nurs. 2019. PMID: 30601268
-
Psychometric properties of the Patient Assessment Of Chronic Illness Care measure: acceptability, reliability and validity in United Kingdom patients with long-term conditions.BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Aug 31;12:293. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-293. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012. PMID: 22938193 Free PMC article.
-
The use of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) instrument in diabetes care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Int J Qual Health Care. 2018 Dec 1;30(10):743-750. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzy091. Int J Qual Health Care. 2018. PMID: 29733366
Cited by
-
Patients' Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC): Validation and Evaluation of PACIC Scale among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Hungary.Int J Integr Care. 2022 Aug 8;22(3):5. doi: 10.5334/ijic.6010. eCollection 2022 Jul-Sep. Int J Integr Care. 2022. PMID: 36043029 Free PMC article.
-
Role of Psychological Distress in the Assessment of Chronic Illness Care and Self-Management Behaviors of Elderly Patients with T2DM Chronic Complications.Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2025 Jan 22;18:185-196. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S498507. eCollection 2025. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2025. PMID: 39866523 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Allemani C, Matsuda T, Di Carlo V, Harewood R, Matz M, Nikšić M, et al.. Global surveillance of trends in cancer survival 2000–14 (CONCORD-3): analysis of individual records for 37 513 025 patients diagnosed with one of 18 cancers from 322 population-based registries in 71 countries. Lancet. 2018;391:1023–1075. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)33326-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical