ArticleDiseases (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Wellbeing Thermometer in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Validation Study.
Article in Diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- When Minds Race and Bodies Ache: Investigating the Dual Burden of Generalized Anxiety and Somatic Symptoms on Nursing Students' Well-Being During Exams at Qassim University.Advances in medical education and practice · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWellbeing is a valuable outcome with benefits for patients and the wider healthcare system. Different instruments are available to measure wellbeing; however, each has its own limitations. Existing wellbeing models focus mostly on a single aspect (e.g., social). The Wellbeing Thermometer (WbT) was developed based on a more holistic framework for wellbeing.
objectiveThe aim of this research was to validate the WbT on patients receiving treatments using a sample of patients with colorectal cancer in England.
methodsA survey, including GAD-7, PHQ-9, WHO-5, and WbT, was administered to two independent cohorts of adult patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer. The WbT consists of 25 questions/items: 5 for each domain of health, thoughts, emotions, spiritual, and social. We investigated the psychometric properties of the WbT to characterize item difficulty, discrimination, and reliability. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to compare WbT scores to those from other validated tools. A multivariable logistic model explored associations between WbT domains and other validated tools.
resultsCronbach's alpha for WbT was 0.872 (95% confidence interval: 0.829-0.902), indicating good internal consistency. The item difficulty for WbT showed low scores for questions 6 (0.39) and 9 (0.49) and high scores for the other items. Item 3 in the health subgroup indicated weak discrimination towards the health item score (r = 0.35) and no discrimination towards the total score (r = 0.03). Item 1 in the spiritual subgroup showed weak discrimination towards the spiritual item score (r = 0.37). The WbT showed moderate to strong correlation with all other validated tools (r range: GAD-7, -0.49 to -0.77; PHQ-9, -0.69 to -0.83; WHO-5, 0.66 to 0.85). For Cohort 1, the WbT thought domain was associated with GAD-7 (
conclusionsThe WbT is a valid tool for assessing wellbeing in patients with colorectal cancer. The WbT may be a useful addition to both clinical practice and future research and may help shed light on a new area with regards to patients with cancer, specifically how they feel and function. This will ultimately increase wellbeing and reduce suffering.
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.