Validity of the Holistic Complementary and Alternative Medicines Questionnaire
Author Information
Author(s): Paula Kersten, White P. J., Tennant A.
Primary Institution: School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton
Hypothesis
This article aimed to examine the construct validity of the Holistic Complementary and Alternative Medicine Questionnaire (HCAMQ) using modern psychometric approaches.
Conclusion
The original two-factor structure of the HCAMQ could not be supported, but two valid shortened subscales can be used.
Supporting Evidence
- The study included 221 patients with chronic stable pain waiting for joint replacement.
- Factor analysis and Mokken scaling failed to support the original two-factor structure of the HCAMQ.
- Two valid shortened subscales were created for holistic health beliefs and CAM beliefs.
Takeaway
Researchers wanted to see if a questionnaire about alternative medicine really worked, and they found that the original way it was set up didn't fit, but they made two shorter versions that do work.
Methodology
The HCAMQ was completed by 221 patients with chronic stable pain, and its validity was tested using Cronbach alpha's, factor analysis, Mokken scaling, and Rasch analysis.
Potential Biases
There is a potential for self-selection bias in the study sample.
Limitations
The study may have self-selection bias as participants were specifically looking at acupuncture effectiveness.
Participant Demographics
Patients had chronic stable pain predominantly from a single joint (hip or knee) of mechanical origin, with a mean age of 66.8 years and 58% females.
Statistical Information
P-Value
0.03
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website