OBJECTIVE: Evaluation and validation of the psychometric properties of the eight-item modified Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (mMOS-SS). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary analyses of data from three populations: Boston breast cancer study (N=660), Los Angeles breast cancer study (N=864), and Medical Outcomes Study (N=1,717). The psychometric evaluation of the eight-item mMOS-SS compared performance across populations and with the original 19-item Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (MOS-SS). Internal reliability, factor structure, construct validity, and discriminant validity were evaluated using Cronbach's alpha, principal factor analysis (PFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Spearman and Pearson correlation, t-test and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. RESULTS: mMOS-SS internal reliability was excellent in all three populations. PFA factor loadings were similar across populations; one factor >0.6, well-discriminated two factor (instrumental/emotional social support four items each) >0.5. CFA with a priori two-factor structure yielded consistently adequate model fit (root mean squared errors of approximation 0.054-0.074). mMOS-SS construct and discriminant validity were similar across populations and comparable to MOS-SS. Psychometric properties held when restricted to women aged ≥ 65 years. CONCLUSION: The psychometric properties of the eight-item mMOS-SS were excellent and similar to those of the original 19-item instrument. Results support the use of briefer mMOS-SS instrument; better suited to multidimensional geriatric assessments and specifically in older women with breast cancer.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluation and validation of the psychometric properties of the eight-item modified Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (mMOS-SS). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary analyses of data from three populations: Boston breast cancer study (N=660), Los Angeles breast cancer study (N=864), and Medical Outcomes Study (N=1,717). The psychometric evaluation of the eight-item mMOS-SS compared performance across populations and with the original 19-item Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (MOS-SS). Internal reliability, factor structure, construct validity, and discriminant validity were evaluated using Cronbach's alpha, principal factor analysis (PFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Spearman and Pearson correlation, t-test and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. RESULTS: mMOS-SS internal reliability was excellent in all three populations. PFA factor loadings were similar across populations; one factor >0.6, well-discriminated two factor (instrumental/emotional social support four items each) >0.5. CFA with a priori two-factor structure yielded consistently adequate model fit (root mean squared errors of approximation 0.054-0.074). mMOS-SS construct and discriminant validity were similar across populations and comparable to MOS-SS. Psychometric properties held when restricted to women aged ≥ 65 years. CONCLUSION: The psychometric properties of the eight-item mMOS-SS were excellent and similar to those of the original 19-item instrument. Results support the use of briefer mMOS-SS instrument; better suited to multidimensional geriatric assessments and specifically in older women with breast cancer.
Authors: Mapuana C K Antonio; Earl S Hishinuma; Claire Townsend Ing; Fumiaki Hamagami; Adrienne Dillard; B Puni Kekauoha; Cappy Solatorio; Kevin Cassel; Kathryn L Braun; Joseph Keaweʻaimoku Kaholokula Journal: Behav Med Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 3.104
Authors: Sarah A Kelleher; Caroline S Dorfman; Jen C Plumb Vilardaga; Catherine Majestic; Joseph Winger; Vicky Gandhi; Christine Nunez; Alyssa Van Denburg; Rebecca A Shelby; Shelby D Reed; Susan Murphy; Marie Davidian; Eric B Laber; Gretchen G Kimmick; Kelly W Westbrook; Amy P Abernethy; Tamara J Somers Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2017-04-11 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Karin Ribi; Stéphanie Rondeau; Felicitas Hitz; Ulrich Mey; Milica Enoiu; Thomas Pabst; Anastasios Stathis; Natalie Fischer; Kerri M Clough-Gorr Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-04-13 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Lisa M Quintiliani; Jessica A Whiteley; Jessica Zhu; Emily K Quinn; Jennifer Murillo; Ramona Lara; John Kane Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 1.847
Authors: Paloma Gómez-Campelo; Elisa M Pérez-Moreno; Carmen de Burgos-Lunar; Carmen Bragado-Álvarez; Rodrigo Jiménez-García; Miguel Á Salinero-Fort Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-02-23 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Eliza M Park; Allison M Deal; Devon K Check; Laura C Hanson; Katherine E Reeder-Hayes; Deborah K Mayer; Justin M Yopp; Mi-Kyung Song; Anna C Muriel; Donald L Rosenstein Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2015-08-17 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Sara Wilcox; Jihong Liu; Cheryl L Addy; Gabrielle Turner-McGrievy; Judith T Burgis; Ellen Wingard; Alicia A Dahl; Kara M Whitaker; Lara Schneider; Alycia K Boutté Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 2.226