Cited by 37Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPediatric Pain Management Techniques

Validation of the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ) in Cantonese-Speaking Chinese Patients

Open access
Ning, Michelle Cheung, Ming, Tony Wong Chi, Mae, Jacqueline Yap Chooi, Ping, Chen Phoon·2008·The Journal of Pain

Abstract

Unlabelled Acceptance of chronic pain has become an important concept in understanding and predicting that chronic pain sufferers can remain engaged with meaningful aspects of life. Assessment of acceptance has been facilitated by the development of Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ). In this study, we aimed to test the reliability and validity of translated Chinese version of CPAQ to use this important tool in the future management of Hong Kong Chinese patients with chronic nonmalignant pain. Content validity was established by consensus formed among a panel of 5 experts in clinical psychology and pain specialty during the process of forward and backward translations. Test-retest reliability was examined by completing the Chinese CPAQ twice, 2 weeks apart, by 54 patients. A total of 224 Chinese patients with chronic nonmalignant pain attending our cluster multidisciplinary pain clinic were asked to complete a battery of psychometric instruments in Chinese, including an intake form for demographic data, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS), Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36 (SF-36), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ). Analysis results showed that Chinese CPAQ had good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.79) and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.79). The Chinese CPAQ score was significantly correlated to anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, pain self-efficacy, and physical and psychosocial disability. Scree plot and Principal Components Factor analysis confirmed the same 2-factor construct as the original English CPAQ. Construct validity of the Chinese CPAQ can therefore be supported. In conclusion, the Chinese CPAQ is a reliable clinical assessment tool with valid construct for acceptance measurement in our heterogeneous Chinese patients sample with chronic nonmalignant pain.Perspective This article confirms the reliability and validity of a Chinese version of the CPAQ. The Chinese CPAQ can then be used by pain clinicians caring for Chinese chronic pain patients worldwide for acceptance-based psychometric assessment as well as therapies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpain.2008.04.005

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ning, M. C., Ming, T. W. C., Mae, J. Y. C., & Ping, C. P.
Affiliations
Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Corresponding author
Ning, Michelle Cheung
Venue
The Journal of Pain
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-09
Volume
9
Issue
9
Pages
823-832
ISSN
1526-5900 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1969492173
Cited by
37
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2009-08-01)
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire, chronic pain acceptance, chronic nonmalignant pain, Cantonese translation, psychometric validation, test-retest reliability, construct validity, anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, pain self-efficacy, disability, Chinese patients
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Analysis of Variance, Chronic Disease, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Female, Hong Kong, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Pain Measurement, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Reproducibility of Results, Principal Component Analysis, Asian People

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review