PURPOSE: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) acts as one of the most frequently used self-reported measures in cancer practice. The evidence for construct validity of HADS, however, remains inconclusive. The objective of this study is to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version HADS (C-HADS) in terms of construct validity, internal consistency reliability, and concurrent validity in dyads of Chinese cancer patients and their family caregivers. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study, conducted in multiple centers: one hospital in each of the seven different administrative regions in China from October 2014 to May 2015. A total of 641 dyads, consisting of cancer patients and family caregivers, completed a survey assessing their demographic and background information, anxiety and depression using C-HADS, and quality of life (QOL) using Chinese version SF-12. Data analysis methods included descriptive statistics, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and Pearson correlations. RESULTS: Both the two-factor and one-factor models offered the best and adequate fit to the data in cancer patients and family caregivers respectively. The comparison of the two-factor and single-factor models supports the basic assumption of two-factor construct of C-HADS. The overall and two subscales of C-HADS in both cancer patients and family caregivers had good internal consistency and acceptable concurrent validity. CONCLUSIONS: The Chinese version of the HADS may be a reliable and valid screening tool, as indicated by its original two-factor structure. The finding supports the basic assumption of two-factor construct of HADS.
PURPOSE: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) acts as one of the most frequently used self-reported measures in cancer practice. The evidence for construct validity of HADS, however, remains inconclusive. The objective of this study is to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version HADS (C-HADS) in terms of construct validity, internal consistency reliability, and concurrent validity in dyads of Chinese cancerpatients and their family caregivers. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study, conducted in multiple centers: one hospital in each of the seven different administrative regions in China from October 2014 to May 2015. A total of 641 dyads, consisting of cancerpatients and family caregivers, completed a survey assessing their demographic and background information, anxiety and depression using C-HADS, and quality of life (QOL) using Chinese version SF-12. Data analysis methods included descriptive statistics, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and Pearson correlations. RESULTS: Both the two-factor and one-factor models offered the best and adequate fit to the data in cancerpatients and family caregivers respectively. The comparison of the two-factor and single-factor models supports the basic assumption of two-factor construct of C-HADS. The overall and two subscales of C-HADS in both cancerpatients and family caregivers had good internal consistency and acceptable concurrent validity. CONCLUSIONS: The Chinese version of the HADS may be a reliable and valid screening tool, as indicated by its original two-factor structure. The finding supports the basic assumption of two-factor construct of HADS.
Authors: Jianfei Xie; Ziyu Wan; Yinglong Duan; Miao Wang; Yating Luo; Panpan Xiao; Yue Kang; Yi Zhou; Xiaofei Luo; Qian Sun; Andy S K Cheng Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-03-28 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Zhonglin Chen; Gan He; Yi Zhao; Chenyan Han; Lei Xu; Hong Jian; Qiao Chu; Yaping He Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-08-15 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Tao Wang; Alex Molassiotis; Jing-Yu Tan; Betty Pui Man Chung; Hou-Qiang Huang Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-08-10 Impact factor: 3.603