ArticleBMC psychology2026
Selecting the optimal version of the post-traumatic growth inventory - short form for cancer survivors: a study using a sequential design.
Article in BMC psychology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPrevious efforts to validate the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory – Short Form (PTGI-SF) within the French context and among cancer survivors have yielded inconclusive results. This study aimed to select the optimal French version of the PTGI-SF between two candidate versions of the questionnaire (i.e., the American and the Italian).
methodsSequential design was implemented, combining psychometric analyses—including confirmatory factor analysis, composite reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity—on a large sample of French cancer survivors (i.e., the VICAN5 survey), with an expert consensus process using the Technique for Research of Information by Animation of a Group of Experts (TRIAGE), which involved individual consultation followed by collective deliberation.
resultsThe psychometric analysis, conducted on a sample of 3,823 cancer survivors, demonstrated that the two candidate versions of the PTGI-SF exhibit equivalent psychometric properties. Following a comprehensive review of the questionnaires, experts unanimously concluded that the American version was the most suitable for the French context (SB-RMSEA = 0.074; SB-CF = 0.953; SB-TLI = 0.915; SRMR = 0.035; RRC from 0.594 to 0.695). This preference was based on its superior questionnaire structure, enhanced item readability in relation to the assessed dimensions, and better alignment with the language and experiences of cancer survivors as observed in clinical practice and real-world experience.
conclusionThe selected PTGI-SF version reflects a careful balance between statistical rigor and practical applicability in clinical settings and holds promise for improving the identification of post-traumatic growth in clinical settings.
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.