PURPOSE: Concerns about fertility and parenthood are important to many young adult (YA) female cancer survivors and are associated with poorer quality of life. We aimed to develop a new scale to comprehensively measure these concerns so that they can be better addressed. METHODS: Scale development involved: (1) seven focus groups to identify reproductive concerns among YA female cancer survivors and develop potential scale items followed by pilot testing and cognitive interviews to refine items, (2) administering surveys to 204 YA female survivors and conducting principal components analysis (PCA) with oblique rotation to identify underlying factors in the multidimensional scale, and (3) identification of preliminary construct validity evidence. RESULTS: We subjected 37 potential scale items to PCA, which indicated a six-factor solution. After removing low-loading and cross-loading items, we selected the three top loading items representing each factor. The 18-item Reproductive Concerns After Cancer scale (α = 0.82) assesses concerns about fertility potential, partner disclosure, child's health, personal health, acceptance, and becoming pregnant. As hypothesized, women who wanted to have a baby (p < 0.001) and those for whom having a biological child was very important (p < 0.05) had higher mean scores, indicating higher concerns. CONCLUSIONS: The scale demonstrated good internal consistency and evidence of construct validity and holds promise for future clinical and research applications. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: An effective tool to identify concerns related to fertility and parenthood is essential for meeting the long-term reproductive health needs of young women who have survived cancer.
PURPOSE: Concerns about fertility and parenthood are important to many young adult (YA) female cancer survivors and are associated with poorer quality of life. We aimed to develop a new scale to comprehensively measure these concerns so that they can be better addressed. METHODS: Scale development involved: (1) seven focus groups to identify reproductive concerns among YA female cancer survivors and develop potential scale items followed by pilot testing and cognitive interviews to refine items, (2) administering surveys to 204 YA female survivors and conducting principal components analysis (PCA) with oblique rotation to identify underlying factors in the multidimensional scale, and (3) identification of preliminary construct validity evidence. RESULTS: We subjected 37 potential scale items to PCA, which indicated a six-factor solution. After removing low-loading and cross-loading items, we selected the three top loading items representing each factor. The 18-item Reproductive Concerns After Cancer scale (α = 0.82) assesses concerns about fertility potential, partner disclosure, child's health, personal health, acceptance, and becoming pregnant. As hypothesized, women who wanted to have a baby (p < 0.001) and those for whom having a biological child was very important (p < 0.05) had higher mean scores, indicating higher concerns. CONCLUSIONS: The scale demonstrated good internal consistency and evidence of construct validity and holds promise for future clinical and research applications. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: An effective tool to identify concerns related to fertility and parenthood is essential for meeting the long-term reproductive health needs of young women who have survived cancer.
Authors: Christie A Befort; Jennifer R Klemp; Heather L Austin; Michael G Perri; Kathryn H Schmitz; Debra K Sullivan; Carol J Fabian Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-12-25 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Wayne A Bardwell; Loki Natarajan; Joel E Dimsdale; Cheryl L Rock; Joanne E Mortimer; Kathy Hollenbach; John P Pierce Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: John P Barile; Bryce B Reeve; Ashley Wilder Smith; Matthew M Zack; Sandra A Mitchell; Rosemarie Kobau; David F Cella; Cecily Luncheon; William W Thompson Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2012-08-18 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Michael Joffe; Jane Key; Nicky Best; Niels Keiding; Thomas Scheike; Tina Kold Jensen Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2005-06-22 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Christina M Lam; Ksenya Shliakhtsitsava; Shaylyn S Stark; Alexa C O Medica; Kelsey A Pinson; Brian W Whitcomb; H Irene Su Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Vicky Lehmann; Leena Nahata; Amanda C Ferrante; Jennifer A Hansen-Moore; Nicholas D Yeager; James L Klosky; Cynthia A Gerhardt Journal: J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 2.223
Authors: Shaylyn S Stark; Loki Natarajan; Diana Chingos; Jennifer Ehren; Jessica R Gorman; Michael Krychman; Brian Kwan; Jun J Mao; Emily Myers; Tom Walpole; John P Pierce; H Irene Su Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-12-12 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: H Irene Su; Shaylyn Stark; Brian Kwan; Sarah Boles; Diana Chingos; Jennifer Ehren; Jessica R Gorman; Michael Krychman; Sally A D Romero; Jun J Mao; John P Pierce; Loki Natarajan Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-05-03 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Jessica R Gorman; Brian W Whitcomb; Daniel Standridge; Vanessa L Malcarne; Sally A D Romero; Samantha A Roberts; H Irene Su Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2016-09-30 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Katie Young; Ksenya Shliakhtsitsava; Loki Natarajan; Emily Myers; Andrew C Dietz; Jessica R Gorman; María Elena Martínez; Brian W Whitcomb; H Irene Su Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 6.860