Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39534014›Full record

ArticlePatient related outcome measures2024

Practices for Reporting Scale Structure and Summarizing Scores in Studies Using FAMCARE Scale to Assess Caregiver Satisfaction with Cancer Care: A Scoping Review.

Kristin Vassbotn Guldhav, John Roger Andersen, Kari Eldal, Tonje Lundeby, Pål Andre Hegland

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  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

5 authors.

Kristin Vassbotn GuldhavDepartment of Cancer, Førde Central Hospital, Førde, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8268-6493
John Roger AndersenFaculty of Health and Social Sciences, Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Førde, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-6300-9086
Kari EldalFaculty of Health and Social Sciences, Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Førde, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-7690-4362
Tonje LundebyEuropean Palliative Care Research Centre (PRC), Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-7444-8436
Pål Andre HeglandFaculty of Health and Social Sciences, Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Førde, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-6524-5744

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Satisfaction with care is a concept quantified through diverse measurement tools. However, studies have indicated that measuring satisfaction is challenging due to the construct's multidimensional expression. Thus, obtaining valid results requires careful consideration of the construct's nature and measurement methods. Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to examine how studies involving cancer caregivers have addressed the dimensionality of the construct when using satisfaction with care as an outcome, and whether this is reflected in the score reporting practices. We chose to investigate this by conducting a scoping review of the measurement tool Family Satisfaction with End-of-Life Care Scale (FAMCARE Scale), where scores can be reported as the mean of overall score, subscale scores and single-item scores. Methods: This scoping review consisted of systematic searches using Medline, CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, and Epistemonikos. Two researchers used the Rayyan Qatar Computing Research Institute system to perform a blinded screening process. We extracted information on study design, purpose, evaluating of structural validity, variations in the type of scores reported, and justification for choosing the type(s) of scores that were analyzed. Results: Twenty-three studies were included in the review, and their designs and reporting practices of score type varied substantially. Five studies reported analyses to test the scale's structural validity. Ten studies provided a justification for their choice of reporting method. The most common reporting practice found was using mean of overall scores, present in 20 of the included studies. Twelve studies reported mean of subscale scores, and ten reported single-item mean scores. Conclusion: We found substantial variability in score reporting practices, highlighting the need for a more in-depth understanding and reflection on the multidimensional nature of caregiver satisfaction.

Indexed as

cancer caregiverfamily caregiverfamily satisfactionneoplasmpalliative care

Identifiers

PMID39534014
PMCPMC11556242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.