Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33413695›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2021

Consequences of screening in colorectal cancer (COS-CRC): development and dimensionality of a questionnaire.

Jessica Malmqvist, Volkert Siersma, Christine Winther Bang, John Brodersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Internal Structure of the Work-Family Conflict Questionnaire (WFCQ) in Teacher Teleworking.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Jessica MalmqvistThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Oester Farimagsgade 5, 1514, Copenhagen, Denmark. jema@sund.ku.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9299-4369
Volkert SiersmaThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Oester Farimagsgade 5, 1514, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Christine Winther BangThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Oester Farimagsgade 5, 1514, Copenhagen, Denmark.
John BrodersenThe Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Oester Farimagsgade 5, 1514, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

Region Sjælland 13-000849
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHarms of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening include psychosocial consequences. We have not identified studies using a participant-relevant questionnaire with adequate measurement properties to investigate these harms. However, Brodersen et al. have previously developed a core questionnaire consequences of screening (COS) for use in screening for life-threatening diseases. Therefore, the objectives were: (1) To investigate content validity of COS in a CRC screening setting and in case of gaps in content coverage (2) generate new items and themes and (3) test the possibly extended version of COS for dimensionality and differential item functioning (DIF) using Rasch Models.

methodsWe performed two-part-focus-groups with CRC screenees. Screenees were recruited by strategic sampling. In the first part 16 screenees with false-positive results (n = 7) and low-risk polyps (n = 9) were interviewed about their CRC screening experiences and in the second part COS was examined for content validity. When new information was developed in the focus groups, new items covering this topic were generated. Subsequently, new items were, together with COS, tested in the subsequent interviews. A random subsample (n = 410) from a longitudinal questionnaire study, not yet published, was used to form the data for this paper. We analysed multidimensionality and uniform DIF with Andersen's conditional likelihood ratio test. We assessed individual item fit to the model. We also analysed Local Dependence (LD) and DIF by partial gamma coefficients using Rasch Models.

resultsCOS was found relevant in a CRC screening setting. However, new information was discovered in the focus groups, covered by 18 new CRC screening-specific items. The Rasch analyses only revealed minor problems in the COS-scales. The 18 new items were distributed on four new CRC screening-specific dimensions and one single item.

conclusionAn extended version of COS specifically for use in a CRC screening setting has been developed. The extended part encompasses four new scales and one new single item. The original COS with the CRC-screening specific extension is called consequences of screening in colorectal cancer (COS-CRC). COS-CRC possessed reliability, unidimensionality and invariant measurement.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerMass ScreeningColorectal NeoplasmsFocus GroupsHumansPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPsychometricsQualitative ResearchReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesColorectal neoplasmsEarly detection of cancerMass screeningPatient reported outcome measures

Identifiers

PMID33413695
PMCPMC7792180

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.