Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32962717›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2020

Towards patient-centred cancer care: cross-cultural validity and responsiveness of the Turkish Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale.

Mevhibe B Hocaoglu, Nilay Hepgul, India Tunnard, Emine Meltem, Hande Efe, Buse Ataoglu, Yeliz Lerzan Baybar, Merve Kınacıgil, Husam Elsharairi, Irene J Higginson

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mevhibe B HocaogluCicely Saunders Institute of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, London, UK. mevhibe.hocaoglu@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1417-7117
Nilay HepgulCicely Saunders Institute of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5980-1457
India TunnardCicely Saunders Institute of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4542-2624
Emine MeltemFaculty of Medicine, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus, Cyprus.
Hande EfeFaculty of Medicine, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus, Cyprus.
Buse AtaogluFaculty of Medicine, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus, Cyprus.
Yeliz Lerzan BaybarFaculty of Medicine, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus, Cyprus.
Merve KınacıgilFaculty of Medicine, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus, Cyprus.
Husam ElsharairiFaculty of Medicine, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus, Cyprus.
Irene J HigginsonCicely Saunders Institute of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3687-1313
Eastern Mediterranean University · CYKing's College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA valid measure to describe the most important needs and concerns of people with life-threatening illnesses is missing in Cyprus. Our aim was to adapt and test the cross-cultural validity and responsiveness of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) in a cohort of Turkish speaking cancer patients.

methodsThe IPOS (English) patient-reported measure was translated into Turkish following published guidelines including, 2 independent forward, 2 independent blind backward translations, expert panel review by 7 members and field testing with 11 cognitive interviews (5 patients and 6 specialists) and final approval of the copyright holder. Consecutive cancer patients (n = 234) seen by the community palliative care services were recruited from Help Those with Cancer Society (KHYD); of those 82 were followed-up. The instrument was administered by personal interview. Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used to validate the factor structure of Turkish IPOS. Internal consistency reliability of the subscales was evaluated by Cronbach's alpha and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient respectively. Validity was assessed by calculating Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) between Turkish IPOS scores and Turkish version of EQ-5D-3L - a validated generic measure of health status developed by the EuroQol Group.

resultsTurkish IPOS is conceptually and semantically equivalent to the English version and linguistically valid. The CFA was inconclusive for the three factor structure due to low sample size, as the SRMR and CFI tests only approached the defined minimums warranting further investigation. There were low levels of missing values, and no ceiling or floor effects. The Physical (α = 0.91) and the Social and Quality of Care Issues (α = 0.75) sub-scales showed good internal consistencies, however Emotional sub-scale showed poor internal consistency (α = 0.64). The reliability of the Physical (ICC = 0.51, 0.45-0.56 95% CI) and Social Quality of Care Issues (ICC = 0.50, 0.42-0.57 95% CI) were moderate. Poor internal consistency (α =0.64) and reliability (ICC = 0.31, 0.24-0.39, 95% CI) was obtained for Emotional Subscale. Construct validity was evidenced through significant correlations in the predicted directions and strength with EQ-5D. Turkish IPOS showed higher needs and concerns in participants at more advanced stages than those at earlier stages of cancer. The standardized response mean (SRM) of - 0.94 suggested large internal responsiveness to clinical change.

conclusionTurkish IPOS is a clear, relevant, acceptable measure and responsive to the needs and concerns of cancer patients, observing regional differences, it may have implications for use in other Turkish speaking communities. Future studies are needed to clarify the factor structure, assess its external responsiveness and to improve the properties of its Emotional subscale.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAgedCross-Cultural ComparisonFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPalliative CarePatient-Centered CarePsychometricsQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsTranslationsCancerPalliative carePatient reported outcome measuresPsychometricsValidation study

Identifiers

PMID32962717
PMCPMC7507708
OpenAlexW3088598335

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.