Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33144871›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2020

Development, Reliability, and Validity of the"Knowledge-Attitude-Practice" Questionnaire of Foreigners on Traditional Chinese Medicine Treatment.

Lusha Li, Junlu Zhang, Qiaohua Qiao, Lihong Wu, Liying Chen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lusha LiDepartment of General Practice, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1805-503X
Junlu ZhangDepartment of General Practice, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Qiaohua QiaoDepartment of General Practice, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Lihong WuDepartment of General Practice, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.
Liying ChenDepartment of General Practice, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8895-3775
Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo develop a "knowledge-attitude-practice" questionnaire as an evaluating tool of foreigners' cognition on TCM treatment, so as to promote the internationalization of TCM.

methodsThe questionnaire was based on the "knowledge-attitude-practice" model and adjusted by expert consultation using the Delphi method. After conducting a survey among foreigners, Cronbach's

resultsA total of 10 experts participated in two rounds of expert consultation. The recovery rates of two rounds of expert consultation form were 100.0%. The coefficient authority in two rounds of expert consultation was 0.87 and 0.88, respectively. The concentration of expert opinions in the knowledge, attitude, and practice dimensions was 3.80 to 4.70 points, 3.70 to 4.50 points, and 3.60 to 4.40 points, respectively, in the first round and 4.30 to 4.80 points, 4.10 to 4.60 points, and 4.00 to 4.50 points, respectively, in the second round. The coefficient of variation in the knowledge, attitude, and practice dimensions was 0.10-0.32, 0.16-0.29, and 0.19-0.35, respectively, in the first round and 0.09-0.19, 0.15-0.25, and 0.16-0.31, respectively, in the second round. The

conclusionsAfter two rounds of expert consultation based on the Delphi method, the results of expert authority, expert coordination, and expert opinions' concentration were promising, and the expert consultation results were reliable. The "knowledge-attitude-practice" questionnaire of foreigners on TCM treatment in English had good reliability and validity and can evaluate foreigners' cognition on TCM treatment.

Identifiers

PMID33144871
PMCPMC7596425
OpenAlexW3093826246

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.