ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
Is the social withdrawal subscale a valid instrument to assess social withdrawal among colorectal cancer survivors with permanent stomas? A validation study.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social alienation among people with bladder cancer: A combined structural equation modeling and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Stigma, stoma acceptance, quality of life among patients with colorectal cancer intestinal ostomy: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Adaptation to colorectal cancer and ostomy: Psychological flexibility mitigates loneliness associated with social withdrawal.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Social support and its associated factors among older adult patients with intestinal stomas: a cross-sectional study in Guangxi, China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Stigma and social withdrawal among colorectal cancer survivors with permanent stomas: the mediating role of social motivation in psychosocial adaptation.Frontiers in psychiatry · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough social withdrawal is common among colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors with permanent stomas, it has been poorly addressed due to a lack of valid assessment tools. The social withdrawal subscale (SWS) from the Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness (ISMI) scale shows promise for assessing social withdrawal. However, there was no available data on its validity for this purpose. This study aimed to investigate the reliability and validity of the SWS as a screening tool for identifying survivors at risk of social withdrawal.
methodsTwo separate convenience samples of 127 and 245 CRC survivors with permanent stomas were selected. Item analysis and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were conducted with the first sample of 127 survivors. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), reliability analysis, and tests for convergent and discriminant validity were performed with the second sample of 245 survivors. Additionally, the screening cut-off score and accuracy of the SWS scores were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.
resultsThe item-total correlation coefficients of the SWS ranged from 0.530 to 0.787. The EFA demonstrated a single-factor structure for the SWS. The CFA confirmed appropriate construct validity (χ²/df = 103.115/52 = 1.983, goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.925, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.959, and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.068). The test-retest reliability was 0.849. Pearson correlation analysis showed significant and moderate to large relationships between the SWS and the chosen criterion measures, supporting its good convergent validity. ROC analysis identified SWS scores of ≥ 15 as the optimal screening cut-off, with a sensitivity of 86.5%, specificity of 50.5%, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.748 (95% CI: 0.673-0.823, P < 0.001).
conclusionThe SWS demonstrates acceptable reliability and validity for measuring social withdrawal among CRC survivors with permanent stomas. Future studies should further evaluate its utility in clinical settings.
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.