Sophie Robinson1,2, David W Kissane1,3,4,5, Joanne Brooker1,3, Natasha Michael4,6, Jane Fischer7, Michael Franco5,6, Courtney Hempton1,3, Merlina Sulistio4, Julie F Pallant8, David M Clarke1, Susan Burney2,3. 1. Department of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia. 2. School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia. 3. Szalmuk Family Psycho-oncology Unit, Cabrini Institute, Malvern, Australia. 4. Cabrini Palliative Care Service, Cabrini Health, Prahran, Australia. 5. Supportive and Palliative Care Unit, Monash Health, Clayton, Australia. 6. Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia. 7. Department of Palliative Care, Calvary Health Care Bethlehem, Caulfield, Australia. 8. Department of Rural Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Demoralization Scale (DS) was initially validated in 2004 to enable the measurement of demoralization in patients with advanced cancer. Subsequent shortcomings indicated the need for psychometric strengthening. Here, the authors report on the refinement and revalidation of the DS to form the DS-II, specifically reporting the scale's internal validity. METHODS: Patients with cancer or other progressive diseases who were receiving palliative care (n = 211) completed a revised version of the 24-item DS and a measure of symptom burden (the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale). Exploratory factor analysis and Rasch modeling were used to evaluate, modify, and revalidate the scale, providing information about dimensionality, suitability of response format, item fit, item bias, and item difficulty. Test-retest reliability was examined for 58 symptomatically stable patients at a 5-day follow-up. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis supported a 22-item, 2-component model. Separate Rasch modeling of each component resulted in collapsing the response option categories and removing 3 items from each component. Both final 8-item subscales met Rasch model expectations and were appropriate to sum as a 16-item total score. The DS-II demonstrated internal consistency and test-retest reliability (Meaning and Purpose subscale: α = .84; intraclass correlation [ICC] = 0.68; Distress and Coping Ability subscale: α = .82; ICC = 0.82; total DS: α = .89; ICC = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: The DS-II is a 3-point response, self-report scale comprising 16 items and 2 subscales. Given its revalidation, psychometric strengthening, and simplification, the DS-II is an improved and more practical measure of demoralization for research and clinical use. External validation of the DS-II will be reported subsequently. Cancer 2016;122:2251-9.
BACKGROUND: The Demoralization Scale (DS) was initially validated in 2004 to enable the measurement of demoralization in patients with advanced cancer. Subsequent shortcomings indicated the need for psychometric strengthening. Here, the authors report on the refinement and revalidation of the DS to form the DS-II, specifically reporting the scale's internal validity. METHODS:Patients with cancer or other progressive diseases who were receiving palliative care (n = 211) completed a revised version of the 24-item DS and a measure of symptom burden (the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale). Exploratory factor analysis and Rasch modeling were used to evaluate, modify, and revalidate the scale, providing information about dimensionality, suitability of response format, item fit, item bias, and item difficulty. Test-retest reliability was examined for 58 symptomatically stable patients at a 5-day follow-up. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis supported a 22-item, 2-component model. Separate Rasch modeling of each component resulted in collapsing the response option categories and removing 3 items from each component. Both final 8-item subscales met Rasch model expectations and were appropriate to sum as a 16-item total score. The DS-II demonstrated internal consistency and test-retest reliability (Meaning and Purpose subscale: α = .84; intraclass correlation [ICC] = 0.68; Distress and Coping Ability subscale: α = .82; ICC = 0.82; total DS: α = .89; ICC = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: The DS-II is a 3-point response, self-report scale comprising 16 items and 2 subscales. Given its revalidation, psychometric strengthening, and simplification, the DS-II is an improved and more practical measure of demoralization for research and clinical use. External validation of the DS-II will be reported subsequently. Cancer 2016;122:2251-9.
Authors: Cristiano Scandurra; Francesco Mangiapia; Roberto La Rocca; Francesco Di Bello; Natascia De Lucia; Benedetta Muzii; Micaela Cantone; Rita Zampi; Gianluigi Califano; Nelson Mauro Maldonato; Nicola Longo Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-05-18 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Andrew S Huhn; Mary M Sweeney; Robert K Brooner; Michael S Kidorf; D Andrew Tompkins; Hasan Ayaz; Kelly E Dunn Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2018-10-30 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Susan Koranyi; Andreas Hinz; Julia M Hufeld; Tim J Hartung; Leonhard Quintero Garzón; Uta Fendel; Anne Letsch; Matthias Rose; Peter Esser; Anja Mehnert-Theuerkauf Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2021-11-24
Authors: Irene Bobevski; David W Kissane; Sigrun Vehling; Anja Mehnert-Theuerkauf; Martino Belvederi Murri; Luigi Grassi Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2021-12-04 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Madeline Li; Gilla K Shapiro; Roberta Klein; Anne Barbeau; Anne Rydall; Jennifer A H Bell; Rinat Nissim; Sarah Hales; Camilla Zimmermann; Rebecca K S Wong; Gary Rodin Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2021-07-21 Impact factor: 3.234
Authors: Andrew S Huhn; Robert K Brooner; Mary M Sweeney; Denis Antoine; Alexis S Hammond; Hasan Ayaz; Kelly E Dunn Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 3.913