ArticleDermatology (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Translation and Validation of the Dutch Version of the Sun Exposure and Protection Index.
Article in Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSkin cancer is currently the most common cancer type worldwide, and numbers are rapidly increasing. To improve primary prevention, individualised prevention strategies may be of interest as this enhances the chance of long-term behavioural change. The Sun Exposure and Protection Index (SEPI), previously validated in multiple languages, is a tool that could help identify individuals with risky behaviour and tailor interventions to the person's propensity to change. The aim of the present study was to investigate the reliability and validity of a Dutch version of the SEPI for both usage in daily clinical practice and research.
methodsPatients were included at primary care settings and dermatology outpatient settings in a 1:1 ratio. Participants were asked to fill out the SEPI together with some baseline characteristics and the previously validated FACE-Q Skin Cancer - Sun Protection module. Construct validity was tested by comparing SEPI part I and the FACE-Q module using Spearman's Rho. Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach's Alpha for both SEPI parts separately. To assess test-retest reliability, the SEPI was again filled out 3 weeks later, and scores were compared with Cohen's weighted Kappa.
resultsOf the 171 participants completing the first questionnaire, 147 (86.0%) participants also completed the follow-up questionnaire. Comparison between the corresponding SEPI part I and FACE-Q module questions showed good correlations regarding sun exposure habits (correlation coefficients ranging from 0.61 to 0.85). Internal consistency of SEPI part I was 0.63 and SEPI part II was 0.65. The test-retest analysis indicated reproducibility over time (weighted Kappa ranging from 0.38 to 0.76).
conclusionIn conclusion, the Dutch version of the SEPI is shown to be a valid and reliable tool for both usages in daily clinical practice and research to evaluate individual ultraviolet exposure and measure a person's propensity to limit it.
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.