Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 406

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessing the Quality of Preparation for Posthospital Care from the Patient??s Perspective: The Care Transitions Measure

Coleman, Eric A., Mahoney, Eldon, Parry, Carla·2005·Medical Care

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Evidence that both quality and patient safety are jeopardized for patients undergoing transitions across care settings continues to expand. Performance measurement is one potential strategy towards improving the quality of transitional care. A valid and reliable self-report measure of the quality of care transitions is needed that is both consistent with the concept of patient-centeredness and useful for the purpose of performance measurement and quality improvement. OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop and test a self-report measure of the quality of care transitions that captures the patient's perspective and has demonstrated utility for quality improvement. SUBJECTS: Patients aged 18 years and older discharged from one of the 3 hospitals of a vertically integrated health system were included. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional assessment of factor structure, dimensionality, and construct validity. RESULTS: The Care Transitions Measure (CTM), a 15-item uni-dimensional measure of the quality of preparation for care transitions, was found to have high internal consistency, reliability, and reflect 4 focus group-derived content domains. The measure was shown to discriminate between patients discharged from the hospital who did and did not have a subsequent emergency department visit or rehospitalization for their index condition. CTM scores were significantly different between health care facilities known to vary in level of system integration. CONCLUSIONS: The CTM not only provides meaningful, patient-centered insight into the quality of care transitions, but because of the association between CTM scores and undesirable utilization outcomes, it also provides information that may be useful to clinicians, hospital administrators, quality improvement entities, and third party payers.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00005650-200503000-00007

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 22 references

Cited by

See all 406

Metadata

Authors
Coleman, E. A., Mahoney, E., & Parry, C.
Venue
Medical Care
Published
2005-03
Volume
43
Issue
3
Pages
246-255
ISSN
0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2098047679
Cited by
406
References
22
FWCI
9.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assessing the Quality of Preparation for Posthospital Care from the Patient??s Perspective: The Care Transitions Measure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00005650-200503000-00007
The paper
Coleman, E. A., Mahoney, E., & Parry, C. (2005). Assessing the Quality of Preparation for Posthospital Care from the Patient??s Perspective: The Care Transitions Measure. Medical Care. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-200503000-00007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.