ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
Psychometric Validation of the Dampness Syndrome Scale of Chinese Medicine for People in China.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine for metabolic conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Spatial, temporal and demographic distribution characteristics of adenomyosis symptom clusters from the perspective of traditional Chinese medicine: a multicenter cross-sectional study in China from 2020 to 2022.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Qu-Shi-Jie-Du Decoction for Prevention of Recurrence and Metastasis in High-Risk Stage II/III Colon Cancer: Study Protocol for a Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dampness syndrome is a basic syndrome of many major and chronic diseases. Early screening and identification of dampness syndrome are important. The Dampness Syndrome Scale of Chinese Medicine (DSSCM) was developed to measure the occurrence and severity of dampness syndrome. The measurement characteristics of the DSSCM should be further validated. The objective of this study is to evaluate the reliability and validity of the DSSCM based on a cross-sectional survey. Methods: The development of DSSCM was based on the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) theory, expert consensus and clinical investigations. Participants were recruited from Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine and Guangzhou Cadre Health Management Center in Guangdong Province, China. All participants completed the baseline questionnaire and DSSCM. The reliability of the DSSCM was evaluated by internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability. The factor structure was tested with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), while discriminant validity was evaluated by calculating the difference between the total score of the DSSCM and its four dimensions for participants with or without dampness syndrome. We used a clinician's diagnosis of dampness syndrome as a criterion to evaluate the criterion validity. Multivariate regression analysis was used to analyze the associations among gender, age, height, and weight and dampness syndrome. Results: A total of 880 participants were enrolled for psychometric validation and 869 participants were included in the final analyses after exclusion. The mean age of the participants was 42.62±12.86 years. The Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the four dimensions of the DSSCM were 0.809, 0.891, 0.816 and 0.780. The ICCs for the four dimensions of the DSSCM were 0.806, 0.674, 0.780 and 0.760. For validity, the results showed that the DSSCM had good content validity, discriminant validity and criterion validity. For the CFA, the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.091; the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) was 0.074; the comparative fit index (CFI) was 0.766; and the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) was 0.745. Weight was found to be associated with the total scores of the DSSCM and its three dimensions. Conclusion: The DSSCM has good reliability and validity to support its use as a tool for assessing the severity of dampness syndrome. This study provides empirical evidence for future updates to the DSSCM.
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.