Cited by 19Adolescent and Pediatric HealthcareHospital Admissions and OutcomesPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare

Development of a Caregiver-Reported experience measure for pediatric Hospital-to-Home transitions

Open access
Desai, Arti D., Jacob‐Files, Elizabeth A., Lowry, Sarah J., Opel, Douglas J., Mangione‐Smith, Rita, Britto, Maria T., Howard, Waylon J.·2018·Health Services Research

Abstract

Objective: To develop and test a caregiver‐reported experience measure for pediatric hospital‐to‐home transitions. Data Sources/Study Setting: Primary data were collected between 07/2014 and 05/2015 from caregivers within 2–8 weeks of their child's discharge from a tertiary care children's hospital. Study Design/Data Collection: We used a step‐wise approach to developing the measure that included drafting de novo survey items based on caregiver interviews (n = 18), pretesting items using cognitive interviews (n = 18), and pilot testing revised items among an independent sample of caregivers (n = 500). Item reduction statistics and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were performed on a test sample of the pilot data to refine the measure, followed by CFA on the validation sample to test the final measure model fit. Principal Findings: Of 46 initial survey items, 19 were removed after pretesting and 19 were removed after conducting item statistics and CFA. This resulted in an eight‐item measure with two domains: transition preparation (four items) and transition support (four items). Survey items assess the quality of discharge instructions, access to needed support and resources, care coordination, and follow‐up care. Practical fit indices demonstrated an acceptable model fit: χ2 = 28.3 (df = 19); root‐mean‐square error of approximation = 0.04; comparative fit index = 0.99; and Tucker–Lewis index = 0.98. Conclusions: An eight‐item caregiver‐reported experience measure to evaluate hospital‐to‐home transition outcomes in pediatric populations demonstrated acceptable content validity and psychometric properties.

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 · 10.1111/1475-6773.12864

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The Pediatric Transition Experience Measure is a self-report measure of a parent's perception of transition preparation and support from the hospital (11 items; McDonald's coefficient omega for internal consistency reliability was 0.84).

    “The Pediatric Transition Experience Measure is a self-report measure of a parent’s perception of transition preparation and support from the hospital (11 items).87 McDonald’s coefficient omega to examine internal consistency reliability was 0.84.88”

    From Coached, Coordinated, Enhanced Neonatal Transition (CCENT): Protocol for a multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled trial of transition-to-home support for parents of high-risk infants (2021) · cites this paper as [88]

    The Abstract describes a caregiver-reported measure with transition preparation and transition support domains, but says the final measure has eight items, not 11. The Internal Consistency Reliability section reports McDonald’s omega of 0.84 for the overall measure, although the citing sentence attaches a different citation to that figure. (LLM, conf=0.92)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Dillman, D. A. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York: Wiley.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Desai, A. D., Jacob‐Files, E. A., Lowry, S. J., Opel, D. J., Mangione‐Smith, R., Britto, M. T., & Howard, W. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Seattle Children's Research Institute (US)
  • Department of Pediatrics University of Washington Seattle Children's Research Institute Seattle WA
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Desai, Arti D.
Venue
Health Services Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-05-08
Volume
53
Issue
S1
Pages
3084-3106
ISSN
  • 0017-9124 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-6773
OpenAlex
W2800106159
Cited by
19
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Seattle Children's Research Institute (Pediatric Early Research Career Award)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Adolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Hospital Admissions and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Keywords
hospital-to-home transition, pediatric hospital discharge, transition preparation, transition support, discharge instructions, care coordination, follow-up care, children's hospitals, psychometric validation, content validity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aftercare, Child, Child, Preschool, Continuity of Patient Care, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Hospitals, Pediatric, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Discharge, Socioeconomic Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Caregivers, Young Adult

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