ArticlePloS one2016
Development and Preliminary Face and Content Validation of the "Which Health Approaches and Treatments Are You Using?" (WHAT) Questionnaires Assessing Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use in Pediatric Rheumatology.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parental management of autoimmune disease with complementary and alternative medicine: a scoping review of the literature in OECD countries.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2025Article
- Understanding data visualization techniques in qualitative studies used to develop and validate patient-reported outcome measures: a targeted literature review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Adolescents' perspectives on non-pharmacological pain interventions for sickle cell crisis management: A population-based survey.PloS one · 2025Article
- Factors influencing telehealth awareness, utilization, and satisfaction in KSA: A national population-based study.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2024Article
- Article
- Inter-Rater Reliability, Construct Validity, and Feasibility of the Modified "Which Health Approaches and Treatments Are You Using?" (WHAT) Questionnaires for Assessing the Use of Complementary Health Approaches in Pediatric Oncology.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Expert consensus on the development of a health-related questionnaire for the pediatric field of Korean medicine: a Delphi study.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2020Article
- Development and validation of the needs of children questionnaire: An instrument to measure children's self-reported needs in hospital.Journal of advanced nursing · 2019Article
- Caregivers' knowledge and acceptance of complementary and alternative medicine in a tertiary care pediatric hospital.Journal of pain research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveComplementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is commonly used by children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), yet no validated questionnaires assess that use. The objective of this study was to develop child self- and parent proxy-report questionnaires assessing CAM use and to determine the face and content validity of the "Which Health Approaches and Treatments are you using?" (WHAT) questionnaires in pediatric rheumatology.
methodsA sequential phased mixed methods approach was used to develop the questionnaires. A Delphi Survey of 126 experts followed by an interdisciplinary consensus conference of 14 stakeholders in CAM, general pediatrics and pediatric rheumatology was held to develop consensus on the content of the questionnaires using a nominal group technique. To determine face and content validity of the questionnaires, two groups, including (a) a purposive sample of 22 children with JIA 8 to 18 years and their parents from the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario and the Hospital for Sick Children, and (b) 21 Canadian pediatric rheumatology experts, participated in interviews. Participants were independently asked about the goal, understandability and comprehensiveness of the WHAT questionnaires, as well as the relevance of items.
resultsConsensus was reached on 17 items of the WHAT questionnaires. The domains found to be relevant were child's CAM use, factors associated with CAM use, perceived impact of CAM use, and communication about CAM. A total of 15 items in the parent proxy-report questionnaire and 13 items in the child report questionnaire showed adequate content validity.
conclusionsConsensus was reached by experts on the content of a pediatric CAM questionnaire. Face and content validity testing and modifications made to the WHAT questionnaires have helped ensure adequate preliminary validity for use in pediatric rheumatology. This constitutes the basis for further testing of these questionnaires in pediatric rheumatology and for adaptation to other chronic diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.