ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Cultural Adaptation and Preliminary Validation of Adherence Questionnaires for Japanese Patients with Breast Cancer: A Pilot Study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This pilot study conducted a cultural adaptation and preliminary validation of the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ) and the Medication Adherence Rating Scale (MARS) for Japanese patients with breast cancer. Patients and Methods: The grammatical accuracy of the Japanese translations of the BMQ and MARS, which are originally in English, was assessed by 10 physicians. A pilot survey was conducted with 50 patients with breast cancer in Japan who were starting adjuvant endocrine therapy. Internal consistency was examined using item-total and item-rest correlations and Cronbach's alpha. Items with low correlations were flagged for revision or removal. Oncology experts further reviewed problematic items for clinical relevance and cultural appropriateness. Results: Several items showed low relevance, particularly those that were inconsistent with the Japanese healthcare context. In the BMQ, Q6 ("This medicine is a mystery to me") and Q14 ("Natural remedies are safer than medicines") had low item-rest correlations (r = 0.079 and 0.075, respectively). In the MARS, four items (Q3-Q5 and Q9) were redundant. Conclusion: This pilot study demonstrated the significance of culturally adapting the BMQ and MARS. Revising or removing culturally incongruent items improved their relevance and reliability for Japanese patients with breast cancer.
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.