ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2026
Development and psychometric evaluation of the knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward complementary and alternative medicine in stroke.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stroke is a major public health concern and leading cause of long-term disability. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is increasingly used in stroke management, yet public knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding its use remain poorly understood. Misconceptions or lack of awareness may lead to unsafe practices and delays in seeking medical care. Objective: The study aimed to develop the Knowledge, Attitude and Practice toward Complementary and Alternative Medicine use in Stroke Management (KAP-CAM-Stroke) questionnaire and conduct an initial psychometric evaluation. Methods: This multi-phase instrument-development study comprised Phase I, which included item generation, content validation using a two-round Delphi technique, face validity, and pilot testing, and Phase II, which used a cross-sectional survey to conduct an initial psychometric evaluation in 136 members of the Malaysian public. IRT was applied to the knowledge domain, whereas EFA was used for the attitude and practice domains. Results: The final questionnaire comprised 58 items across four sections: sociodemographic (16 items), knowledge (10 items), attitude (10 items), and practice (22 items). Content validity was supported by S-CVI/Ave values of at least 0.90 after Delphi Round 2. IRT identified variable item performance in the knowledge domain, including an unstable extreme discrimination estimate for item K4. EFA identified a four-factor attitude structure explaining 63.84% of the variance (Cronbach's alpha = 0.655) and a six-factor practice structure explaining 74.94% (Cronbach's alpha = 0.860). These findings provide preliminary evidence of content and structural validity; internal consistency met the prespecified threshold for the knowledge and practice domains but not for the attitude domain. Conclusion: The KAP-CAM-Stroke questionnaire provides preliminary psychometric evidence for assessing public knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding CAM use in stroke management. Further evaluation in larger and more diverse samples, including test-retest reliability and confirmatory factor analysis, is required before the instrument can be considered fully validated.
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.