ArticleContrast media & molecular imaging2022
The 22-Item Benefit Finding Scale: Validation and Application among Patients with Cervical Cancer in Ethnic Minority Areas of Southwestern China.
Article in Contrast media & molecular imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Benefit finding in adults living with somatic non-communicable chronic disease: a systematic review on the mean level and the prevalence.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Cognitive behavioral stress management affects different dimensions of benefit finding in breast cancer survivors: a multilevel mediation model.Psychology & health · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, the Benefit Finding Scale (BFS) has been translated and culturally adapted for use in China. However, further validation of the instrument is required before it can be used in the management of patients with cervical cancer in China. In this study, we conducted the questionnaire survey and examined its properties. This methodological study was conducted at a tumor hospital located in southwestern China. Patients with cervical cancer who had been reexamined in the outpatient department of the hospital and hospitalized from June to August 2019 were selected. The item analysis, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and reliability analysis were tested. The relationships between benefit finding and sociodemographic and disease-related variables were analyzed by ANOVA and regression models. A total of 247 patients were assessed (mean age: 48.0 ± 13.3 years). Educational level, self-perceived disease severity, and physical exercise were the predictors of benefit finding. The correlation coefficient between 22 items and their dimensions was the best. EFA analysis supported a five-factor model for structure validity. All Cronbach's alpha for the Chinese version of the BFS (BFS-C) was greater than 0.80. The results demonstrated the good reliability and validity of BFS-C. It appears to be a useful scale to assess experience of benefit finding among patients with cervical cancer in China.
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.