ArticleInternational journal of cancer2026
Development and psychometric properties of a general cancer stigma scale.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comments on "Development and Psychometric Properties of a General Cancer Stigma Scale (COMPASS)".International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Reply to "Comments on Development and Psychometric Properties of a General Cancer Stigma Scale (COMPASS)".International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Factors Associated With Delay in Seeking Medical Care Among Breast Cancer Patients in Bangladesh.Cureus · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer stigma negatively impacts diagnosis, quality of life, and survival outcomes, yet stigma reduction efforts are hindered by the lack of a valid and universal scale to measure cancer stigma. This study aimed to develop and validate a global cancer stigma scale, the Cross-Cultural Oncology Measure for Perception and Awareness of Stigma Scale (COMPASS), which measures internalized, anticipated, and enacted stigma. The scale was developed using mixed methods in two phases: (1) feedback from experts and people with cancer on an initial pool of items, and (2) psychometric validation with people with cancer. Data were collected from two cancer centers in Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, and Lilongwe, Malawi. We examined the scale's initial psychometric properties, including item-total correlation, reliability, factorial validity, and construct validity. Initial qualitative interviews informed the generation and refinement of 50 items, which were then administered to 209 individuals with cancer. Psychometric analysis reduced the scale to 28 items distributed across three stigma domains: anticipated (8 items), internalized (8 items), and enacted (12 items). The refined scale demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties, with confirmatory factor analysis supporting a three-factor model fit (CFI = 0.859, RMSEA = 0.112, SRMR = 0.063) and strong reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.92 to 0.97). Validity was confirmed through strong correlations with related constructs. COMPASS offers a reliable, valid, and cross-culturally applicable tool to measure the magnitude and impact of cancer stigma globally and facilitate the evaluation of stigma reduction interventions.
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.