CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 123Family and Disability Support ResearchPatient Satisfaction in HealthcareAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluating family‐centred service using a measure of parents’ perceptions

King, G A, Rosenbaum, P L, King, S M·1997·Child: Care, Health and Development
DOI 10.1046/j.1365-2214.1997.840840.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article describes the use of a newly‐developed measure of parents’ perceptions of health care providers’ behaviours (Measure of Processes of Care — MPOC) to evaluate the family centredness of children’s rehabilitation services. The measure was developed with the participation of more than 1600 parents of children with chronic neurodevelopmental conditions throughout Ontario. It assesses five domains: enabling and partnership; providing general information; providing specific information about the child; coordinated and comprehensive care; and respectful and supportive care. By comparing the perceptions of parents receiving services from three different types of organizations or programmes, we demonstrated that the MPOC can pick up differences between parents in their experiences of caregiving. We also demonstrated that the MPOC is able to detect differences in how parents view the family‐centredness of services provided by individual centres. The data indicate that the MPOC has appreciable utility in providing programmes and services with a description of their current level of family‐centred service as perceived by parents. The strengths, limitations and potential uses of the measure in other contexts are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2214.1997.840840.x

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–122 of 122

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
King, G. A., Rosenbaum, P. L., & King, S. M.
Affiliations
  • Thames Valley Children's Centre (CA)
  • McMaster University (CA)
Corresponding author
  • King, G A
  • King, S M
ORCID
Venue
Child: Care, Health and Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1997-01
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
47-62
ISSN
  • 0305-1862 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2214
DOI
10.1046/j.1365-2214.1997.840840.x
OpenAlex
W2136179138
Cited by
123
References
7
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 2492 d)
Locations
  • Child Care Health and Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
McMaster University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Adolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Keywords
family-centered care, Measure of Processes of Care, parental attitudes, caregiver experiences, care coordination
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Analysis of Variance, Child, Developmental Disabilities, Child Health Services, Child, Preschool, Cleft Lip, Cleft Palate, Consumer Behavior, Female, Humans, Infant, Male, Ontario, Parents, Professional-Family Relations, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rehabilitation Centers, Sampling Studies, Process Assessment, Health Care, Patient-Centered Care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review