ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing
Translation, Adaptation, and Validation of Revised Colorectal Cancer Perception and Screening Instrument among First-Degree Relatives of People with Colorectal Cancer in China.
Article in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of colorectal cancer and colonoscopy screening health beliefs scale for first-degree relatives of people with colorectal cancer (CCHBS-FDR) in China.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Article
- Colonoscopy Uptake in First-Degree Relatives of CRC Patients: Challenges and Intervention Strategies.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Review
- Effectiveness of a tailored communication intervention on colonoscopy uptake for firstdegree relatives of colorectal cancer patients: A randomized controlled trial.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2022Article
- Psychometric properties of a Chinese version of four-factor colorectal cancer screening belief scale.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2022Article
- Colonoscopy Screening Behaviour and Associated Factors Amongst First-Degree Relatives of People with Colorectal Cancer in China: Testing the Health Belief Model Using a Cross-Sectional Design.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of the study was to translate and validate the psychometric properties of the Revised Colorectal Cancer Perception and Screening (RCRCPS) instrument for the first-degree relatives (FDRs) of people with colorectal cancer (CRC) in China.
methodsThe translation, adaptation, and validation guideline developed by Sousa and Rojjanasrirat was used to guide this study. All items from the Colorectal Cancer Perception and Screening (CRCPS) instrument and three items from the Perceived Barriers Questionnaire were combined and further adapted for a colonoscopy test, resulting in RCRCPS. The resultant RCRCPS was translated from English to Chinese through forward- and backward-translation methods, and a panel review was conducted to examine its content validity. The RCRCPS (simplified Chinese version) was then tested with a convenience sample of 197 Chinese FDRs of patients with CRC. Validity was tested through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and discriminative validity, and reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α and test-retest reliability.
resultsThe content validity index (CVI) of the RCRCPS (simplified Chinese version) was satisfactory (item CVI = 0.80-1 and scale CVI = 0.92). The results demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.74-0.87) and test-retest reliability in a 4-week interval (intraclass coefficient = 0.53-0.84). CFA revealed that the RCRCPS (simplified Chinese version) conformed to the four-factor model suggested by the original version (Chi-square/degree of freedom = 1.326, root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.041, comparative fit index = 0.904, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.896, and standardized root mean square residual = 0.684).
conclusionsThe 38-item simplified Chinese version of RCRCPS demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity. Healthcare professionals may use this instrument in the development and evaluation of interventions to promote colonoscopy screening among people at an increased risk of developing CRC.
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.