You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Confirmatory factor analysis of the Korean version of the short-form McGill pain questionnaire with chronic pain patients: a comparison of alternative models
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12955-014-0195-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sun Ah Choi, ChongNak Son, Jang-Han Lee, Sungkun Cho |
| Abstract |
The Short Form of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) is the most widely used assessment of the quality and intensity of pain. In previous validation studies, the factor structure of the SF-MPQ varied widely from various two-factor structures to a five-factor structure, although research on the SF-MPQ quite consistently supports its two-factor structure (i.e., sensory and affective) across different countries and languages. In Korea, the results of exploratory factor analysis of a Korea version of SF-MPQ (KSF-MPQ) showed 2-factor structure consisting of 'sensory' and 'affective' excluding two items such as splitting and heavy. As an attempt to further validate the KSF-MPQ, the purpose of this study was to confirm whether the KSF-MPQ model is an appropriate model for chronic pain patients in Korea by comparing several alternative models of the SF-MPQ. A total of 150 chronic pain patients seeking treatment in Seoul, Korea, participated and completed the KSF-MPQ. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to evaluate the adequacy of the KSF-MPQ model and several alternative models. The results indicated that the adjusted KSF-MPQ model showed the best fit to the data among the models in chronic pain patients in Korea. The results showed the KSF-MPQ is cross-culturally equivalent to the original questionnaire. Thus, the KSF-MPQ is valid measurement for assessing the quality and intensity of pain to chronic pain patients and may be helpful in clinical and research settings in Korea. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 33% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 17% |
| Psychology | 4 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 February 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,820
of 2,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,271
of 361,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#25
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,297 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 361,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.