Psychometric Properties of the Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study (CAHPS) 2.0 Adult Core Survey

Published in: Health Services Research, v. 38, no. 6, pt. 1, Dec. 2003, p. 1509-1527

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2003

by J. Lee Hargraves, Ron D. Hays, Paul Cleary

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.blackwell-synergy.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the reliability and validity of survey measures used to evaluate health plans and providers from the consumer's perspective. DATA SOURCES: Members (166,074) of 306 U.S. health plans obtained from the National CAHPSs Benchmarking Database 2.0, a voluntary effort in which sponsors of CAHPS surveys contribute data to a common repository. STUDY DESIGN: Members of privately insured health plans serving public and private employers across the United States were surveyed by mail and telephone. Interitem correlations and correlations of items with the composite scores were estimated. Plan-level and internal consistency reliability are estimated. Multivariate associations of composite measures with global ratings are also examined to assess construct validity. Confirmatory factor analysis is used to examine the factor structure of the measure. FINDINGS: Plan-level reliability of all CAHPSs 2.0 reporting composites is high with the given sample sizes. Fewer than 170 responses per plan would achieve plan-level reliability of .70 for the five composites. Two of the composites display high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 45.75), while responses to items in the other three composites were not as internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha from .58 to .62). A five factor model representing the CAHPSs 2.0 composites fits the data better than alternative two- and three-factor models. CONCLUSION: Two of the five CAHPS s 2.0 reporting composites have high internal consistency and plan-level reliability. The other three summary measures were reliable at the plan level and approach acceptable levels of internal consistency. Some of the items that form the CAHPS 2.0 adult core survey, such as the measure of waiting times in the doctor's office, could be improved. The five-dimension model of consumer assessments best fits the data among the privately insured; therefore, consumer reports using CAHPS surveys should provide feedback using five composites.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.