ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2026
Adaptation and psychometric validation of the Turkish version of the motivation for healing scale in patients with cancer.
Article in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The Motivation for Healing Scale (MHS) is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the motivation for healing in patients with cancer. This methodological study aimed to translate the MHS into Turkish and evaluate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version (T-MHS). Methods: The study sample consisted of 320 oncology patients selected using convenience sampling method. The T-MHS was assessed for face, content, construct, and convergent validity, as well as internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Face validity was evaluated by patients, content validity was evaluated using the Content Validity Index (CVI), and construct validity was evaluated using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Convergent validity was examined by correlating the T-MHS scores with illness uncertainty and hope. Reliability was determined using Cronbach's alpha and test-retest method. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 30.0) and AMOS (version 26.0). Results: The mean patient age was 52.99 ± 13.50 years. The T-MHS demonstrated strong content validity (CVI = 0.98) and high internal consistency (Cronbach's Conclusions: The T-MHS is a reliable and valid instrument for the clinical assessment of patients with cancer and for research aimed at interventions that enhance motivation for healing in this population.
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.