Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39314572›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Evaluation of the Structural and Construct Validity of the Credibility and Expectancy Scale for Patients With Musculoskeletal Disorders.

Hiroshi Takasaki, Yusuke Handa, Hiroki Chiba, Tomoya Kitamura

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Hiroshi TakasakiDepartment of Physical Therapy, Saitama Prefectural University, Koshigaya, JPN.
Yusuke HandaGraduate School of Rehabilitation Science, Saitama Prefectural University, Koshigaya, JPN.
Hiroki ChibaGraduate School of Rehabilitation Science, Saitama Prefectural University, Koshigaya, JPN.
Tomoya KitamuraGraduate School of Rehabilitation Science, Saitama Prefectural University, Koshigaya, JPN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background The Credibility Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ) includes three items each on the credibility and expectancy subscales. Credibility indicates to what extent the treatment is reasonable, and expectancy indicates to what extent the treatment is expected to be effective. The CEQ has been assumed to have a two-factor structure: credibility and expectancy, among patients receiving psychotherapy. However, its internal structure has been unknown to patients receiving physical therapy for musculoskeletal disorders. This study aimed to explore the internal structure of the CEQ and preliminary investigate the construct validity of the CEQ among patients receiving physical therapy for musculoskeletal disorders. Methodology A multi-center prospective cohort study was conducted. Data from 100 patients receiving outpatient physical therapy for musculoskeletal disorders was collected using an anonymous paper-based survey. The initial survey was conducted immediately before the initial physical therapy session, and the second survey was conducted after the third to seventh physical therapy sessions. The Patient Specific Functional Scale 2.0 (PSFS 2.0) was collected in both surveys, and the CEQ and an 11-point global rating of change scale (GRCS) were collected in the second survey. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted for the CEQ, and internal consistency was assessed for each subscale and an identified factor structure. Convergent validity in construct validity was also assessed with the hypothesis that Pearson's r values of each CEQ factor score to the PSFS 2.0 change scores and GRCS would range from 0.4 to 0.6. Results An exploratory factor analysis revealed a one-factor structure, where the percentage of the variance for the extraction sums of squared loadings was 62.8%. Cronbach's alpha was 0.89 for all items, 0.91 for the credibility subscale, and 0.75 for the expectancy subscale. Hypothesized correlations to the PSFS 2.0 change score and GRCS were detected with the CEQ total score (r = 0.48 for the PSFS 2.0 change score and r = 0.59 for the GRCS) and each subscale score (credibility subscale, r = 0.48 for the PSFS 2.0 change score and r = 0.49 for the GRCS; and expectancy subscale, r = 0.43 for the PSFS 2.0 change score and r = 0.62 for the GRCS). Conclusion A single-factor internal structure of the CEQ was detected among patients receiving physical therapy for musculoskeletal disorders. Additionally, preliminary evidence of construct validity was detected with convergent validity between the CEQ and functional and perceived improvement.

Indexed as

credibilityexpectancymckenzie methodmechanical diagnosis and therapymusculoskeletal painoutcomepsychometricquestionnairerationaletreatment

Identifiers

PMID39314572
PMCPMC11419591

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.