ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Development and validation of a Chinese version of a questionnaire to evaluate the knowledge, attitude, and practice about breast cancer screening among financial female workers in Taiwan.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to develop a Chinese version of a questionnaire to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of breast cancer screening among female workers in the financial industry and to evaluate its reliability and validity. Methods: An item pool relevant to knowledge of and attitudes toward breast cancer screening was generated, and 16 experts assessed the validity of the instrument's content relevance and domain coverage. We conducted a cross-sectional study of 1,511 women working in the financial industry in Taiwan. The questionnaire's construct validity was assessed using correlations between the items and other scales to evaluate knowledge of and attitudes toward breast cancer screening. The internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's α values. Results: Positive and negative attitudes toward mammography and attitudes toward reasons for not receiving a mammography accounted for 68.3%, 10.3%, and 20.9% of total variance, respectively. The Cronbach's α coefficients for knowledge of and attitudes toward breast cancer screening were 0.37 and 0.91, respectively. One interquartile range (IQR) increase in the total scores on the breast cancer attitudes toward mammography (6 points; adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.24-1.75) and the total scores on the reasons for not receiving a mammography (8 points; AOR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.46-2.20) were significantly associated with the practice of having ever received a mammography. Both scores showed significant exposure-response associations. Conclusion: Our findings indicate that the Chinese version of the questionnaire used to evaluate attitudes and practices toward breast cancer screening among female workers in the financial industry demonstrated good construct validity and internal consistency.
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.