ArticleJMIR human factors2026
Development and Validation of the Large Language Model Privacy Concern Assessment Questionnaire: Psychometric Evaluation Study on a Brief Instrument for Assessing User Privacy Concerns With Large Language Model Applications.
Article in JMIR human factors, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Privacy concerns represent a primary barrier to the adoption of large language model (LLM) applications, particularly in sensitive domains such as health care. Although a growing body of survey-based research has examined user privacy concerns with LLMs, no standardized instrument exists for measuring this construct. Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate a concise, standardized questionnaire for assessing user privacy concerns with LLM-based systems, suitable for use by researchers and practitioners such as AI application developers and health care professionals. Methods: A literature review was conducted to identify privacy-related domains relevant to LLM use. A draft questionnaire was developed and subjected to content validity review by 8 experts. The finalized instrument was administered via Qualtrics to adults aged 18 years or older who were aware of LLM-based applications, recruited through the University of Pittsburgh, LinkedIn, and the Pitt+Me research participant registry between April 2025 and July 2026. Internal consistency reliability and factor structure were assessed, with factor structure examined in a split-sample design, in which exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted on a random one-third of the sample and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the holdout two-thirds. Results: All questionnaire items achieved acceptable content validity (item-level content validity index >0.80; average scale-level content validity index=0.964). A total of 603 responses were collected. After preprocessing, the final sample comprised 361 participants. Most participants were younger than 35 years of age (198/361, 54.8%), female (230/361, 63.7%), and White (285/361, 78.9%); 88.1% (318/361) held at least a bachelor's degree. The 6-item questionnaire showed high internal consistency (Cronbach α=0.90; McDonald ω=0.90). EFA (n=121) supported a single dominant factor with all standardized loadings ≥0.70. CFA (n=240) showed excellent fit (comparative fit index=0.996; Tucker-Lewis index=0.993; root mean square error of approximation=0.046; standardized root mean square residual=0.057). A 2-factor model separating the transparency- and control-related items fit significantly better than the 1-factor model (Δ Conclusions: The LLM privacy concern assessment is a concise, psychometrically sound 6-item instrument that measures privacy concern with LLM-based systems via 2 correlated subdimensions (transparency and control; data use and risk salience) summarized by a single total score. It enables standardized measurement across studies and practical privacy assessment in real-world LLM applications.
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.