Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37661961›Full record

ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2023

Psychometric properties of the Korean version of the oncofertility barriers scales among nurses: A methodological study.

Hae Jeong An, Yoonjung Kim

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hae Jeong AnCollege of Nursing, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Yoonjung KimCollege of Nursing, Konyang University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Ewha Womans University · KRKonyang University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Oncofertility Barrier Scale (K-OBS). Methods: This methodological study investigated the validity and reliability of the K-OBS for measuring barriers to oncofertility care among nurses. A total of 270 nurses who had experience in rendering nursing care to cancer survivors were recruited, and the instrument was translated, assessed for content validity, and tested using a preliminary survey. Construct validity was established through explanatory factor analysis. Convergent validity and discriminant validity were analyzed using a multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrix. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega. Results: The K-OBS demonstrated satisfactory validity and reliability, with seven factors, including 27 items explaining 60.42% of the total variance, a Cronbach's alpha of 0.86, and a McDonald's omega of 0.83. The seven factors were labeled, "Lack of information and education" (8 items), "Rigid thinking toward oncofertility care" (5 items), "Cancer patient stereotypes" (4 items), "Insufficient support" (4 items), "Desire for fertility preservation" (2 items), "Interrupted oncofertility care" (2 items), and "Fertility risk" (2 items). Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that the K-OBS may be a suitable instrument with acceptable validity and reliability for evaluating barriers to oncofertility among Korean nurses. This instrument can be used to identify obstacles that make oncofertility care difficult, thereby contributing to new insights for improving the future quality of oncofertility care in Korea.

Indexed as

Cancer survivorsFactor analysisFertilityNursingOncology nursing

Identifiers

PMID37661961
PMCPMC10470221
OpenAlexW4383745164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.