ArticleBMC research notes2026
Development and psychometric validation of the Hair Health and Care Questionnaire (HHCQ): a KAP-based instrument for young adults.
Article in BMC research notes, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveHair plays multiple biological, psychosocial, and cultural roles, impacting psychological well-being and contributing to a rapidly expanding hair care market. This study aimed to validate a questionnaire assessing hair health and care (HHCQ) among young adults.
resultsA total of 200 participants completed the questionnaire (mean age = 20.75 years). Item screening and content validation reduced the initial 46 items to 32. No items were removed following face validation, which relied on a qualitative pilot study. Exploratory factor analysis yielded two factors for knowledge (knowledge about routine hair hygiene and care, and knowledge about hair products and procedures) and one factor for attitudes (attitudes toward hair care). The knowledge and attitude factors accounted for 50.3% and 50.6% of the explained variance, respectively. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the model was acceptable (CFI = 0.955, TLI = 0.991, RMSEA = 0.077, and SRMR = 0.060). Test-retest reliability showed excellent Intraclass Correlation Coefficients, and Cronbach's alpha coefficients were acceptable. Practice items were treated as a formative index, obviating the need for factor or internal consistency analyses. While the 32-item HHCQ showed basic evidence of validation and reliability, it should be culturally adapted to different settings with additional validation. The questionnaire can be used to guide public health campaigns, policymaking, and clinical practice.
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.