↓ Skip to main content

Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of a standardized international questionnaire on use of alternative and complementary medicine (I-CAM - Q) for Argentina

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of a standardized international questionnaire on use of alternative and complementary medicine (I-CAM - Q) for Argentina
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12906-016-1074-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Santiago Esteban, Fernando Vázquez Peña, Sergio Terrasa

Abstract

The widespread and growing use of alternative and complementary medicine (CAM) worldwide has been thoroughly described. In Argentina the limited information on the use of CAM has been reported between 40 and 55 %. However, the rate of use is extremely variable worldwide. For this purpose the international questionnaire on the use of complementary and alternative medicines (I-CAM - Q), was developed. The implementation of a translated and cross-culturally adapted version of the questionnaire would allow for a reliable and standardized evaluation of the rate of use of CAM in Argentina. It would be a great step towards improving what we know about the healing habits of our population. The forward and back-translation method was used. Four translators were involved. A committee was commissioned to reconcile the different versions. The process of cross-cultural adaptation was made by consulting 17 alternative and complementary medicine experts using the DELPHI method. The retrieved questionnaire was evaluated in 18 patients sampled by convenience (9 men, different educational and self-reported health levels). The interviews consisted of three parts: an initial demographics questionnaire; the administration of the I-CAM-Q and finally the cognitive interview, which included reviewing the questionnaire and reexamining questions that generated doubts during the interview. The comprehension of the questions was also evaluated. As a last step, using the information obtained from the interviews, the final version of the questionnaire was drafted. The questionnaire seems to have been accepted by most patients during the interviews. Conflictive elements that emerged did not seem to have an impact on its administration. The flexibility of the questionnaire allowed to add professionals and practices which contributed to a more accurate local adaptation. Further research should focus on assessing the questionnaire's psychometric performance and validity, which so far has not been done.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 15%
Student > Master 3 15%
Professor 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Other 5 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 7 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 20%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 2 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 April 2016.
All research outputs
#1,582,840
of 7,628,277 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#483
of 1,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,543
of 274,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#11
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,628,277 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,894 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,471 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.