Benefit finding in adult cancer populations: Psychometric properties and performance of existing instruments |
| |
| Institution: | 1. La Trobe/Austin Clinical School of Nursing, PO Box 5555, Level 4 Austin Tower, La Trobe University, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia;2. School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia;3. Department of Nursing, Umeå University, Sweden;1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California–Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA;2. Children''s Orthopaedic Center, Children''s Hospital Los Angeles, 4650 W Sunset Boulevard, Mailstop #69, Los Angeles, CA 90027, USA;3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, 06100 Sihhiye-Ankara/Turkey;4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children, 2222 Welborn St, Dallas, TX 75219, USA;5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rainbow Babies and Children''s Hospital, Case Western Reserve University, 11100 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA;6. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, 601 North Caroline Street JHOC #5215, Baltimore, Maryland 21287-0882, USA;7. San Diego Center for Spinal Disorders, 4130 La Jolla Village Dr, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA;8. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, New YorkePresbyterian Morgan Stanley Children''s Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, 3959 Broadway, New York, NY 10032, USA;1. School of Nursing, Capital Medical University, You An Men, Beijing 100069, China;2. Beijing Neurosurgical Institute, Beijing Tiantan Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China;1. Endoscopy, Bronchoscopy and Motility, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia;3. Endoscopy, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia |
| |
| Abstract: | PurposeTo analyse the psychometric properties and performance of existing instruments that aim to measure benefit finding in adult cancer populations.MethodsFour electronic databases were searched. The focus was to identify English language, peer-reviewed journal articles where benefit finding is assessed with adult cancer populations. The terms ‘benefit finding’, ‘cancer’, ‘instruments’, ‘scales’, and ‘adult’ were used in various combinations. The instruments were rated against established criteria for instrument construction, reliability, validity, and interpretability.ResultsSeventeen benefit finding instruments were reviewed. The instruments present a multifarious conceptualisation of the construct. Instrument structure is diverse. Several instruments (n = 4) reported on all the psychometric properties, but not interpretability. One instrument, the Stress-Related Growth Scale – Revised, additionally reported correlation statistics with another benefit finding instrument. Based on the information provided, the psychometric rigour of a number of instruments is yet to be established.ConclusionsOne instrument reported validation statistics for all the identified criteria. While existing instruments provide a range of operationalisations of the benefit finding concept and have been more or less used in previous research, a majority are in the early stages of development and require further validation work in adult cancer populations. Given the increasing interest in the role benefit finding in clinical practice, researchers are urged to use these instruments further and to report relevant validation statistics when using them. |
| |
| Keywords: | Benefit finding Cancer Instruments Scales Reproducibility of results Psychometrics Adults |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
