ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025
Assessment of Hope in Pediatric Oncology: Development, Content and Face Validation of a Parental Questionnaire.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 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
introductionWe outline the steps in creating and evaluating the content and face validity of the Questionnaire on Parental Hope in Pediatric Oncology (Q-PHPO), which measures the understanding of information provided by healthcare professionals (Part 1) and hope as experienced and perceived by parents (Part 2).
methodsThe development of the Q-PHPO was based on a literature review and 14 interviews with parents whose children had been diagnosed with cancer. The content and face validity were verified both quantitatively and qualitatively by assessing the clarity, relevance, and discomfort caused by the questionnaire, with input from expert parents (n = 7) and professionals (n = 10).
resultsIn terms of clarity, most items had an item content validity index (I-CVI) ≥ 0.80 and a kappa (K) value ≥ 0.74. Despite more nuanced results being obtained for relevance, most items had an I-CVI ≥ 0.70 and a K value ≥ 0.74. After revision, the first part of the Q-PHPO includes two dimensions: the child's illness (5 items) and the child's psychosocial well-being (4 items). The second part contains 20 items divided into three dimensions: the child's illness (6 items), the child's psychosocial well-being (9 items), and the parent's psychosocial well-being (5 items).
conclusionsThe results provide evidence of the content and face validity of the Q-PHPO. Further testing will confirm the questionnaire's construct and criterion validity and its reliability, making it a potentially valuable tool in pediatric oncology departments. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: In this study, we adopted a Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement approach, actively involving patients, healthcare professionals, and researchers as key contributors to the development and evaluation of the Q-PHPO questionnaire. Parents of children in remission from leukemia and healthcare professionals provided valuable insights based on their lived experiences, influencing the content of the questionnaire, and contributed by assessing the relevance and clarity of the questionnaire items. Researchers specializing in questionnaire development and oncology reviewed and refined the instrument, ensuring its validity and suitability.
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.