Literature DB >> 27878370

Validation of the symbolic assessment of fatigue extent (SAFE)-a cancer fatigue tool with visual response formats.

Subathra Jeyaram1, Surendran Veeraiah2, Vidhubala Elangovan2.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Fatigue is the most common under-recognized symptom in cancer. Administering fatigue tools in multi-lingual and multi-literate populations may affect the quality and accuracy of the data collected as they rely on language to elicit responses. AIM: The aim of the study is to develop and validate a tool to assess fatigue in cancer patients using response formats that are not language-dependent.
METHODS: The content validity of the tool was established using the Delphi procedure and was field tested with 102 cancer patients. Test-retest reliability of the tool was tested with 55 cancer patients and 47 healthy individuals. Convergent, concurrent, and discriminant validity and internal consistency were established with 374 cancer patients, 202 survivors, and 75 healthy controls. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Qualitative analyses, descriptive statistics, product-moment correlation, analysis of variance, Cronbach's α coefficient, and exploratory factor analysis were conducted.
RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha of the SAFE in cancer patients and healthy individuals was .86 and .92, and their test-retest reliability ranged from .44 to .83. SAFE correlated significantly with measures of quality of life (QOL) (r = -0.54, p < .01), anxiety (r = 0.54, p < .01), depression (r = 0.5, p < .01), and sleep (r = 0.52, p < .01). The tool was able to distinguish between cancer patients, survivors, and healthy controls (p < .05). Two factors emerged namely "Fatigue Extent and impact" and "General fatigue" contributing to 52% of the variance in fatigue.
CONCLUSION: A symbolic tool using visual response formats to assess fatigue and its impact in cancer patients was developed and standardized with good reliability and construct, concurrent, and discriminant validity established.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer; Fatigue tool; Measurement; Standardization; Symbolic response formats; Validity

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27878370     DOI: 10.1007/s00520-016-3499-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Support Care Cancer        ISSN: 0941-4355            Impact factor:   3.603


  25 in total

Review 1.  Assessment of fatigue in cancer patients.

Authors:  Paul B Jacobsen
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2004

2.  Focus on psychometrics. Aspects of item analysis.

Authors:  S Ferketich
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 2.228

3.  Using the Delphi technique to examine the content validity of nursing diagnoses.

Authors:  J S Grant; M R Kinney
Journal:  Nurs Diagn       Date:  1992 Jan-Mar

4.  Mode of administration bias.

Authors:  Chad Cook
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2010-06

5.  Daily fatigue patterns and effect of exercise in women with breast cancer.

Authors:  A L Schwartz
Journal:  Cancer Pract       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb

Review 6.  A systematic review of the scales used for the measurement of cancer-related fatigue (CRF).

Authors:  O Minton; P Stone
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2008-08-04       Impact factor: 32.976

7.  The hospital anxiety and depression scale.

Authors:  A S Zigmond; R P Snaith
Journal:  Acta Psychiatr Scand       Date:  1983-06       Impact factor: 6.392

8.  The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1993-03-03       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Cancer-related fatigue and its associations with depression and anxiety: a systematic review.

Authors:  Linda F Brown; Kurt Kroenke
Journal:  Psychosomatics       Date:  2009 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.386

Review 10.  The assessment of fatigue: a practical guide for clinicians and researchers.

Authors:  A J Dittner; S C Wessely; R G Brown
Journal:  J Psychosom Res       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.006

View more
  1 in total

1.  Try to see it my way: exploring the co-design of visual presentations of wellbeing through a workshop process.

Authors:  M P Craven; R Goodwin; M Rawsthorne; D Butler; P Waddingham; S Brown; M Jamieson
Journal:  Perspect Public Health       Date:  2019-04-08
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.