PURPOSE: A new paediatric mucositis assessment instrument, the Children's International Mucositis Evaluation Scale (ChIMES), has required several phases of development. A draft of ChIMES was developed that required further refinement. This paper describes two iterations of refinements of ChIMES using child and parent reporting of understandability, content validity and overall acceptability. METHODS: Parents, children and teenagers were asked to rate their opinion of understandability and overall acceptability of ChIMES on a five-point ordinal scale. Content validity was assessed by whether participants considered the instrument "good", "okay" or "bad". Descriptive analysis of the results was conducted. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-two participants evaluated two iterations. On the initial evaluation, ChIMES was considered easy to understand, acceptable and have content validity. However, minor amendments were required and a further iteration of testing was necessary to achieve a satisfactory instrument. A final version of ChIMES was developed. CONCLUSION: Modification of each draft of ChIMES was performed until comments were minimal and the scores from participants were consistently high. A final instrument appeared to contain the correct content and was easy to understand by parents, older children and teenagers. Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
PURPOSE: A new paediatric mucositis assessment instrument, the Children's International Mucositis Evaluation Scale (ChIMES), has required several phases of development. A draft of ChIMES was developed that required further refinement. This paper describes two iterations of refinements of ChIMES using child and parent reporting of understandability, content validity and overall acceptability. METHODS: Parents, children and teenagers were asked to rate their opinion of understandability and overall acceptability of ChIMES on a five-point ordinal scale. Content validity was assessed by whether participants considered the instrument "good", "okay" or "bad". Descriptive analysis of the results was conducted. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-two participants evaluated two iterations. On the initial evaluation, ChIMES was considered easy to understand, acceptable and have content validity. However, minor amendments were required and a further iteration of testing was necessary to achieve a satisfactory instrument. A final version of ChIMES was developed. CONCLUSION: Modification of each draft of ChIMES was performed until comments were minimal and the scores from participants were consistently high. A final instrument appeared to contain the correct content and was easy to understand by parents, older children and teenagers. Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors: D Tomlinson; L Tigelaar; S Hyslop; T Lazor; L L Dupuis; K Griener; J Oliveria; L Sung Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Laura C Pinheiro; Molly McFatrich; Nicole Lucas; Jennifer S Walker; Janice S Withycombe; Pamela S Hinds; Lillian Sung; Deborah Tomlinson; David R Freyer; Jennifer W Mack; Justin N Baker; Bryce B Reeve Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-09-06 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Alba Ferrández-Pujante; Amparo Pérez-Silva; Clara Serna-Muñoz; José Luis Fuster-Soler; Ana Mª Galera-Miñarro; Inmaculada Cabello; Antonio J Ortiz-Ruiz Journal: Children (Basel) Date: 2022-04-15
Authors: Lillian Sung; Theo Zaoutis; Nicole J Ullrich; Donna Johnston; Lee Dupuis; Elena Ladas Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2012-12-19 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Johanna C Menard; Pamela S Hinds; Shana S Jacobs; Katie Cranston; Jichuan Wang; Darren A DeWalt; Heather E Gross Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2014 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Nathaniel S Treister; Michael Nieder; Christina Baggott; Ellen Olson; Tammy Lo; Xichen Jin; Yun Gao; Lu Chen; Ha Dang; Lillian Sung Journal: Oral Dis Date: 2021-05-15 Impact factor: 4.068
Authors: S Jacobs; C Baggott; R Agarwal; T Hesser; T Schechter; P Judd; D Tomlinson; J Beyene; L Sung Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Tove Kamsvåg; Anncarin Svanberg; Karin Garming Legert; Johan Arvidson; Louise von Essen; Karin Mellgren; Jacek Toporski; Jacek Winiarski; Gustaf Ljungman Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-01-28 Impact factor: 3.603