Trial reportPloS one2016
Cancer Appetite and Symptom Questionnaire (CASQ) for Brazilian Patients: Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation Study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanisms of postoperative anorexia in surgical patients: a narrative review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Translation and validation of the Persian version of Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire in patients with multiple sclerosis.BMC neurology · 2021Article
- Clinical, dietary and demographic characteristics interfering on quality of life of cancer patients.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAppetite and symptoms, conditions generally reported by the patients with cancer, are somewhat challenging for professionals to measure directly in clinical routine (latent conditions). Therefore, specific instruments are required for this purpose. This study aimed to perform a cultural adaptation of the Cancer Appetite and Symptom Questionnaire (CASQ), into Portuguese and evaluate its psychometric properties on a sample of Brazilian cancer patients.
methodsThis is a validation study with Brazilian cancer patients. The face, content, and construct (factorial and convergent) validities of the Cancer Appetite and Symptom Questionnaire, the study tool, were estimated. Further, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted. The ratio of chi-square and degrees of freedom (χ2/df), comparative fit index (CFI), goodness of fit index (GFI) and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) were used for fit model assessment. In addition, the reliability of the instrument was estimated using the composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach's alpha coefficient (α), and the invariance of the model in independent samples was estimated by a multigroup analysis (Δχ2).
resultsParticipants included 1,140 cancer patients with a mean age of 53.95 (SD = 13.25) years; 61.3% were women. After the CFA of the original CASQ structure, 2 items with inadequate factor weights were removed. Four correlations between errors were included to provide adequate fit to the sample (χ2/df = 8.532, CFI = .94, GFI = .95, and RMSEA = .08). The model exhibited a low convergent validity (AVE = .32). The reliability was adequate (CR = .82 α = .82). The refined model showed strong invariance in two independent samples (Δχ2: λ: p = .855; i: p = .824; Res: p = .390). A weak stability was obtained between patients undergoing chemotherapy and radiotherapy (Δχ2: λ: p = .155; i: p < .001; Res: p < .001), and between patients undergoing chemotherapy combined with radiotherapy and palliative care (Δχ2: λ: p = .058; i: p < .001; Res: p < .001).
conclusionThe Portuguese version of the CASQ had good face and construct validity and reliability. However, the CASQ still presented invariance in independent samples of Brazilian patients with cancer. However, the tool has low convergent validity and weak invariance in samples with different treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.