Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25491883›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2014

Development of the Health Literacy of Caregivers Scale - Cancer (HLCS-C): item generation and content validity testing.

Eva Y N Yuen, Tess Knight, Sarity Dodson, Lina Ricciardelli, Susan Burney, Patricia M Livingston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Health literacy in cancer caregivers: a systematic review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Caregiver health literacy in head and neck cancer and its relationship with caregiver and patient psychological distress.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  4. Development of the Swahili Cancer Health Literacy Test for use in the African context.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Eva Y N YuenSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia. eva.yuen@deakin.edu.au.
Tess KnightSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia. tess.knight@deakin.edu.au.
Sarity DodsonPublic Health Innovation, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia. sarity.dodson@deakin.edu.au.
Lina RicciardelliSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia. lina.ricciardelli@deakin.edu.au.
Susan BurneySchool of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. sue.burney@monash.edu.
Patricia M LivingstonFaculty of Health, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia. trish.livingston@deakin.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth literacy refers to an individual's ability to engage with health information and services. Cancer caregivers play a vital role in the care of people with cancer, and their capacity to find, understand, appraise and use health information and services influences how effectively they are able to undertake this role. The aim of this study was to develop an instrument to measure health literacy of cancer caregivers.

methodContent areas for the new instrument were identified from a conceptual model of cancer caregiver health literacy. Item content was guided by statements provided by key stakeholders during consultation activities and selected to be representative across the range of cancer caregiver experiences. Content validity of items was assessed through expert review (n = 7) and cognitive interviews with caregivers (n = 16).

resultsAn initial pool of 82 items was generated across 10 domains. Two categories of response options were developed for these items: agreement with statements, and difficulty undertaking presented tasks. Expert review revealed that the majority of items were relevant and clear (Content Validity Index > 0.78). Cognitive interviews with caregivers suggested that all except three items were well understood.

conclusionA resultant 88 item questionnaire was developed to assess cancer caregiver health literacy. Further work is required to assess the construct validity and reliability of the new measure, and to remove poorly performing and redundant items, which will result in a shorter, final measure. The new measure has the potential to inform the development and evaluation of interventions and the improvement of health service delivery to cancer caregivers.

Indexed as

CaregiversHealth LiteracyAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID25491883
PMCPMC4269846

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.