ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2026
Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese CancerSupportSource
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFamily caregivers of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients often experience significant distress, yet no validated instrument exists in China to screen for this distress. This study aimed to translate the CancerSupportSource™-Caregiver (CSS-Caregiver) scale into Chinese and evaluate its psychometric properties among CRC family caregivers.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted with 340 family caregivers of CRC patients from three tertiary hospitals in Guangzhou. The Chinese CSS-Caregiver was translated and culturally adapted. Its psychometric properties were assessed using both Classical Test Theory and Rasch analysis. Reliability was evaluated via internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Validity was examined through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), item-total correlations, and convergent validity. Measurement invariance was tested using multi-group CFA and Differential Item Functioning (DIF). The optimal cut-off score was determined via ROC analysis.
resultsThe Chinese CSS-Caregiver demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.902) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.935). CFA supported the original five-factor structure with good model fit (χ²/df = 2.064, CFI = 0.956, RMSEA = 0.073). Rasch analysis indicated generally satisfactory item fit and person separation. The scale exhibited strict measurement invariance across sex, age, and residence, with negligible DIF. Strong convergent validity was demonstrated by correlations with the criterion measures (r = 0.81 ~ 0.85). An optimal cut-off score of 18.5 was established.
conclusionsThe Chinese CSS-Caregiver is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing distress among family caregivers of CRC patients in China, facilitating early identification and timely psychosocial support.
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.