Search

The purpose of this study was to describe the development and preliminary testing of a new scale assessing knowledge about melanoma risk factors and early detection/secondary prevention. Data was drawn from a longitudinal study assessing barriers and facilitators of skin self- examination among patients diagnosed with melanoma. For the current analysis, 191 patients who completed the new 9-item Knowledge About Melanoma Early Detection Scale and other study measures were included. Exploratory factor analysis with were conducted, which identified a robust scale comprised of 6 items with factor loadings ranging from .56 to .81. Higher scores on the Knowledge About Melanoma Early Detection Scale were associated with younger age and more positive attitudes about melanoma prevention, but not with biological sex, education, melanoma stage, or past self-administered and physician-provided skin checks. Further studies are needed to replicate these findings and to further establish the predictive validity of this scale and its usefulness for health research., Author(s): Adina Coroiu [sup.1] [sup.2] , Chelsea Moran [sup.3] , Linda Kwakkenbos [sup.4] , Brett D. Thombs [sup.2] [sup.5] [sup.6] [sup.7] [sup.8] [sup.9] , Annett Körner [sup.2] [sup.5] [sup.10] [sup.11] [...]

This paper illustrates a rigorous approach to the initial phases of scale development when evaluating an existing construct, dyadic efficacy, in a new population. Cancer-related dyadic efficacy represents a couples' confidence in their conjoint abilities to manage the effects of cancer. Two samples of individuals diagnosed with cancer and their partners, along with a professional panel, contributed lay and content expertise, respectively. Thematic analysis was used to describe cancer-related dyadic efficacy and identify content domains. Cancer-related dyadic efficacy was conceptualized as multidimensional, consistent with relational functioning, and distinct from self-efficacy. A pool of 50 items was developed to assess eight content domains grouped into three main themes: dyadic efficacy for managing (a) illness intrusions, (b) emotional responses and (c) communication and care for children. This paper responds to calls for more rigorous reporting of the qualitative procedures required to establish a conceptual grounding for a new scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compassion towards oneself and towards others has been associated with positive psychological outcomes, however, research is limited by the availability of valid psychometric measures, particularly in languages other than English. The current study translated (English to French) and validated the following measures: the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scales (CEAS), assessing self-compassion (CEAS-SC), compassion to others (CEAS-TO), and compassion from others (CEAS-FROM); the Compassion Scale (CS); and the Sussex-Oxford Compassion Scales for Self (SOCS-S) and Others (SOCS-O). French-speaking participants were recruited online (N = 384) and completed the translated measures as well as questionnaires assessing self-compassion, depression, anxiety, stress, insecure attachment, mindfulness, and well-being. Confirmatory Factor Analysis supports the original factor structures proposed for the CEAS-FROM (two-factor hierarchical), CS (four-factor hierarchical), SOCS-S and SOCS-O (five-factor hierarchical), with alternate factor structures proposed for CEAS-SC (three-factor) and CEAS-TO (two-factor). Results showed good internal consistency and convergent validity for all scales, supporting the use of total scores for the translated measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IntroductionPsychosocial and rehabilitation interventions are increasingly used to attenuate disability and improve health-related quality of life (HRQL) in chronic diseases, but are typically not available for patients with rare diseases. Conducting rigorous, adequately powered trials of these interventions for patients with rare diseases is difficult. The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) is an international collaboration of patient organisations, clinicians and researchers. The aim of SPIN is to develop a research infrastructure to test accessible, low-cost self-guided online interventions to reduce disability and improve HRQL for people living with the rare disease systemic sclerosis (SSc or scleroderma). Once tested, effective interventions will be made accessible through patient organisations partnering with SPIN.Methods and analysisSPIN will employ the cohort multiple randomised controlled trial (cmRCT) design, in which patients consent to participate in a cohort for ongoing data collection. The aim is to recruit 1500-2000 patients from centres across the world within a period of 5 years (2013-2018). Eligible participants are persons ≥18 years of age with a diagnosis of SSc. In addition to baseline medical data, participants will complete patient-reported outcome measures every 3 months. Upon enrolment in the cohort, patients will consent to be contacted in the future to participate in intervention research and to allow their data to be used for comparison purposes for interventions tested with other cohort participants. Once interventions are developed, patients from the cohort will be randomly selected and offered interventions as part of pragmatic RCTs. Outcomes from patients offered interventions will be compared with outcomes from trial-eligible patients who are not offered the interventions.Ethics and disseminationThe use of the cmRCT design, the development of self-guided online interventions and partnerships with patient organisations will allow SPIN to develop, rigourously test and effectively disseminate psychosocial and rehabilitation interventions for people with SSc.

Objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are evidence‐based tools well‐suited to translate the latest research evidence into recommendations for routine clinical care. Given the rapid expansion of psychosocial oncology research, they represent a key opportunity for informing the treatment decisions of overburdened clinicians, standardizing service delivery, and improving patient‐reported outcomes. Yet, there is little consensus on how clinicians can most effectively access these tools and little to no information on the current availability and scope of CPGs for the range of psychosocial symptoms and concerns experienced by patients with cancer. Method: Our environmental scan consisted of an academic and gray literature designed to identify currently available CPGs addressing a range of cancer‐related psychosocial symptoms. Results: Findings revealed a total of 23 existing psychosocial oncology CPGs that met full eligibility criteria. The gray literature search was found to be more effective at identifying CPGs (n = 22) compared to the academic search (n = 9). Conclusion: Several concerns arose from the systematic search. The limited publication of CPGs in peer‐reviewed journals may make clinicians and stakeholders more hesitant to implement CPGs due to uncertainties about the methodological rigor of the development process. Further, many existing CPGs are outdated or failed to be updated according to guideline recommendations, meaning that the recommendations may fall short of their purpose to translate up‐to‐date research findings. Future directions: Future research should seek to systematically assess the quality of existing psychosocial oncology CPGs and shed light on the current state of implementation and adherence in clinical practice in order to better inform guideline developers on the current needs of the psychosocial oncology community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to examine psychometric properties of the Life Orientation Test-Revised (LOT-R). The LOT-R was administered in five clinical samples, three samples of the adult general population, and one sample of adolescents. Seven of the studies were performed in Germany and two in Colombia. All of the sample sizes were above 300. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were between.57 and.75 for the eight adult samples, the correlations between the scales optimism and pessimism ranged from −.05 to −.37, and the coefficients of temporal stability (test-retest correlations) of the scales ranged from.43 to.69. There were no systematic age and gender effects observed in the nine studies. While the one-factor model of confirmatory factor analyses showed clearly insufficient fit indices among all of the samples, the two-factor model fit was markedly better. The LOT-R proved to be a suitable instrument for measuring dispositional optimism in patients and in the general population, though the sum score should be viewed with caution. Studies comparing the LOT-R mean scores of different samples need not take age and gender distributions into account. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]