ArticleInternational journal of nursing sciences2022
Development and validation of a rapid psychosocial well-being screening tool in patients with metastatic breast cancer.
Article in International journal of nursing sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A scoping review of well-being measures: conceptualisation and scales for overall well-being.BMC psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and validate a rapid psychosocial well-being screening tool for metastatic breast cancer patients (MBC-PsySoc-Well-being). Methods: Applying a mixed method approach, the study was conducted in two phases. Phase 1, a focus group method was employed for item development, and three focus group sessions were conducted, with patients, caregivers, and medical professionals, respectively. Phase 2, validity and reliability testing were performed. Five experts reviewed items for content validity. Construct validity, criterion-related validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability were conducted among a sample of 53 patients with metastatic breast cancer. Results: Six themes were qualitatively analyzed based on focus group participants' responses. Eight items were then developed based on these themes. The index of Item-Objective Congruence scored by the experts ranged from 0.6 to 1.0. An exploratory factor analysis yielded three factors: Being curious and active in information seeking, Enthusiasm to return to a normal life, and Adjusting to positive lifestyle. The total scores of MBC-PsySoc-Well-being and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer's Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) were moderately correlated ( Conclusion: This study represents an initiative to develop a rapid psychosocial well-being screening tool for patients with metastatic breast cancer. The results from validity and reliability testing indicate that the scale is moderately suitable for application to patients with metastatic breast cancer. However, a larger scale study should be further administered to confirm the validity and reliability of the measurement.
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.