ArticleJournal of physical therapy science2023
Cross-cultural adaptation of the pain understanding and confidence questionnaire into Japanese.
Article in Journal of physical therapy science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
[Purpose] This study aimed to develop a culturally adapted Japanese version of the Pain Understanding and Confidence Questionnaire (PUnCQ). The first-factor structure describes management from 12 perspectives for a case vignette of chronic pain and determines whether the management is based on a biomedical or biopsychosocial perspective. The second-factor structure evaluates the confidence level in management skills for the same case from 21 perspectives. [Participants and Methods] We conducted a cross-cultural adaptation based on five stages according to Beaton's guidelines (two forward translations, creation of an integrated forward translation version, two backward translations, creation of a provisional Japanese version, and a pilot test). In the pilot test, we asked 40 Japanese physical therapists to rate their understanding of the PUnCQ descriptions on a five-point Likert scale (1, not at all understandable; 5, completely understandable) and provide comments when they rated 1 to 3. We repeated revisions and pilot tests until less than 10% of the respondents rated 1 for all descriptions. [Results] By conducting two rounds of the pilot test, all items of descriptions satisfied the preestablished criteria. [Conclusion] A Japanese version of the PUnCQ was developed.
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.