ArticleBMJ open2025
Psychometric evaluation of self-advocacy scale in patients with cancer: a psychometric evaluation protocol in Iran.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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.
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
introductionCancer, as a significant global health challenge, poses numerous difficulties for those affected. Self-advocacy, which refers to an individual's capacity and desire to articulate their preferences and needs when confronted with disease-related obstacles, is crucial in enhancing their quality of life. Given the absence of a validated instrument for assessing self-advocacy in the Iranian patient population with cancer, this protocol aims to describe the psychometric properties of the Self-Advocacy in Cancer Survivorship (SACS) Scale in Persian among Iranian patients with cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this methodological study, the SACS Scale will be translated into Persian following the WHO guidelines. Subsequently, the scale's validity, including face validity, content validity, construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis, exploratory factor analysis and convergent validity) and reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability), will be evaluated using SPSS V.24 and Amos V.24 software, along with appropriate statistical tests. Study participants will be patients with cancer in Ardabil, selected through convenience sampling. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study, forming part of a master's thesis, received ethical approval from the research ethics board of Ardebil University of Medical Sciences (IR.ARUMS.REC.1403.227, 7 October 2024). The findings will be disseminated at local, national and international levels.
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.