The patient engagement evaluation tool was valid for clinical practice guideline development

Objective: To evaluate reliability and validity of the six and 12 item Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PEET) to inform guideline developers about the quality of patient and public involvement activities. Study Design and Setting: PEET-12 and three embedded validation questions were completed by patients and members of the public who participated in developing 10 guidelines between 2018 and 2020. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to assess the validity of a single-dimension factor structure. Cronbach's alpha and Pearson correlations were calculated for internal consistency reliability. Concurrent validation was used to test the construct validity. Results: A total of 290 participants completed the PEET-12. To improve tool efficiency, based on results indicating redundancy from initial item analysis and experts' review, six of 12 items were included in the final tool (PEET-6). For the PEET-6, CFA supported the single-factor structure ( chi 2 (15) = 5173.4, P < 0.001, Tucker-Lewis Index = 1.00, Comparative Fit Index = 0.99, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation = 0.08). Correlation between the total score for the 3 validation questions and the PEET-6 total score was 0.71, Conclusion: PEET-6 and 12 are valid tools to measure patient and public involvement within settings of clinical practice guideline development. (c) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http: // creativecommons.org/ licenses/ by/ 4.0/ )

Automated summary

The study evaluated the reliability and validity of the six and twelve item PEET tools, showing that both versions are effective in measuring patient and public involvement in the development of clinical practice guidelines.