ArticleCancer medicine2025
Developing the Short-Form of Lymphedema Needs Questionnaire for Iranian Breast Cancer Patients.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe informational needs of patients with Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema (BCRL) have not been sufficiently addressed in the scientific literature. Moreover, the only existing questionnaire in this field contains many items. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop a short-form version of this questionnaire.
methodsThe questionnaire items were extracted from the Lymphoedema Needs Questionnaire-Breast Cancer (LNQ-BC). Demographic variables and clinical characteristics were considered separately. Out of 62 items, 24 were selected, and 2 additional questions were included based on feedback from 10 experts. 100 participants with BCRL completed the short-form questionnaire. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was performed using principal components extraction and varimax rotation, and Cronbach's alpha was calculated for each dimension.
resultsAfter evaluating the content validity, the instrument's construct validity with 26 items was conducted using EFA. The KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) value was equal to 0.879 and Bartlett's sphericity test was significant (p-value < 0.001), indicating the data's adequacy and appropriateness to perform EFA. Five extracted dimensions were named: "Lymphedema information needs" (5 items), "Informational support, peers" (5 items), "Access to a lymphedema care specialist" (5 items), "Physical and daily activities" (7 items) and "Financial issues and compression garments" (4 items). The level of needs in this study in all dimensions was high (more than 77%).
conclusionsThe high factor loadings and the total explained variance of 78.152% support the construct validity of the short questionnaire. Although some items exhibited cross-loadings, the majority loaded strongly on a single factor, indicating good discriminant validity. Providing services according to the needs of patients can be prioritized. Healthcare providers, insurers, and individuals should be better informed about lymphedema, its associated costs, and the importance of implementing appropriate management programs.
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.