ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the resilience scale for parents of children with cancer.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pediatric cancer ranks among the leading causes of mortality in children globally. While serving as primary caregivers, certain parents may experience anxiety, depression, and other related challenges. However, not all parents succumb to such psychological distress. Resilience emerges as a potential protective factor. Assessing parental resilience holds paramount importance for healthcare professionals in identifying issues and offering tailored interventions. Yet, mainland China lacks adequate tools for this assessment. Hence, this study endeavors to translate the Resilience Scale for Parents of Children with Cancer (RSP-CC) into Chinese and scrutinize its psychometric properties. Methods: From April 2023 to January 2024, a methodological study was conducted in Chengdu, Chongqing, and Jinzhou, China, recruiting 377 eligible parents via convenience sampling for a multicenter cross-sectional survey. The translation process of the RSP-CC adhered rigorously to the Brislin model, involving forward and back-translation, followed by necessary modifications. Item analysis was assessed using the critical ratio and the item-total correlation coefficient. Validity evaluation encompassed content and internal validity assessments. Scale reliability was determined through Cronbach's α coefficient, retest reliability, and split-half reliability coefficients. Results: The Chinese version of the RSP-CC comprises 4 dimensions and 24 items, explaining a cumulative variance contribution of 63.58%. In this investigation, the content validity index attained a score of 0.97. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) yielded four factors consistent with the original scale, while confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated satisfactory fit indices. Both Cronbach's α coefficient and retest reliability stood at 0.95, with a split-half reliability coefficient of 0.82. Conclusion: After rigorous translation and verification, the RSP-CC was adapted in China, demonstrating favorable psychometric characteristics. It stands as an effective instrument for parents of children diagnosed with cancer in China. Additionally, this scale could serve as a crucial tool for clinical staff in formulating specific interventions.
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.