↓ Skip to main content

Validation of the qi blood yin yang deficiency questionnaire on chronic fatigue

Overview of attention for article published in Chinese Medicine, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
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.
Title
Validation of the qi blood yin yang deficiency questionnaire on chronic fatigue
Published in
Chinese Medicine, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13020-016-0092-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jihye Kim, Boncho Ku, Keun Ho Kim

Abstract

Chronic fatigue (CF) reflects an imbalance of inter-organ functions or of the four essential physiological components qi, blood (xue), yin, and yang. CF can be subdivided into different patterns. However, there are no diagnostic methods for CF. This study aimed to clinically validate a pattern identification method by identifying correlations between CF and responses to the qi blood yin yang deficiency questionnaire (QBYY-Q). Participants were recruited between May and June 2014 through the Kyung Hee University Korean Medicine hospital website and via posters and comprised 129 CF patients diagnosed with the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1994) criteria. Participants who had organic diseases that explained the CF were excluded. A total of 159 participants were asked to complete the QBYY-Q, the fatigue severity scale, and the Chalder fatigue scale. The latter two questionnaires were used to assess convergent validity with the QBYY-Q. Among the 129 CF participants, 70 and 59 had chronic fatigue syndrome and idiopathic chronic fatigue, respectively. Two Korean medical doctors independently assessed participants' qi, blood, yin, and yang deficiency patterns using QBYY deficiency pattern identification guidelines. Based on the results of a preliminary study of the QBYY-Q, we selected 32 reliable items for symptoms corresponding to each deficiency pattern. The items were used to estimate internal consistency and construct validity. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was performed for scores on each deficiency pattern. The data were means and standard deviations or numbers of participants and proportions for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. A statistical significance level of P < 0.05 was assumed. The QBYY-Q showed satisfactory internal consistency. Explanatory factor analysis extracted two factors for each deficiency pattern. The percentages of explained variance for qi, blood, yin, and yang deficiency were 45.1, 58.0, 52.2, and 63.4 %, respectively. Each QBYY-Q deficiency score was positively associated with each corresponding deficiency pattern. Qi deficiency was used as a reference category. Odds ratios of blood, yin, and yang deficiency were 10.97, 10.69, and 14.64, respectively. The QBYY-Q was suitable for estimating the influences of qi, blood, yin, and yang deficiencies in CF. Trial registration This trial was registered with the Korean Clinical Trial Register (KCT0001199).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 2%
Unknown 43 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Other 11 25%
Unknown 11 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 14%
Psychology 4 9%
Engineering 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,168,964
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Chinese Medicine
#221
of 660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,734
of 312,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chinese Medicine
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 312,193 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.