Pascoe Liz, Edvardsson David
La Trobe/Austin Clinical School of Nursing, PO Box 5555, Level 4 Austin Tower, La Trobe University, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia.
La Trobe/Austin Clinical School of Nursing, PO Box 5555, Level 4 Austin Tower, La Trobe University, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia; School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Nursing, Umeå University, Sweden.
Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2014 Oct;18(5):484-91. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2014.04.011. Epub 2014 Jun 21.
To analyse the psychometric properties and performance of existing instruments that aim to measure benefit finding in adult cancer populations.
Four electronic databases were searched. The focus was to identify English language, peer-reviewed journal articles where benefit finding is assessed with adult cancer populations. The terms 'benefit finding', 'cancer', 'instruments', 'scales', and 'adult' were used in various combinations. The instruments were rated against established criteria for instrument construction, reliability, validity, and interpretability.
Seventeen benefit finding instruments were reviewed. The instruments present a multifarious conceptualisation of the construct. Instrument structure is diverse. Several instruments (n = 4) reported on all the psychometric properties, but not interpretability. One instrument, the Stress-Related Growth Scale - Revised, additionally reported correlation statistics with another benefit finding instrument. Based on the information provided, the psychometric rigour of a number of instruments is yet to be established.
One instrument reported validation statistics for all the identified criteria. While existing instruments provide a range of operationalisations of the benefit finding concept and have been more or less used in previous research, a majority are in the early stages of development and require further validation work in adult cancer populations. Given the increasing interest in the role benefit finding in clinical practice, researchers are urged to use these instruments further and to report relevant validation statistics when using them.
分析旨在测量成年癌症患者群体中益处发现情况的现有工具的心理测量特性及表现。
检索了四个电子数据库。重点是识别用成年癌症患者群体评估益处发现情况的英文、同行评审期刊文章。“益处发现”“癌症”“工具”“量表”和“成年”等术语以各种组合方式使用。根据既定的工具构建、信度、效度和可解释性标准对这些工具进行评分。
对17种益处发现工具进行了综述。这些工具对该结构呈现出多种概念化方式。工具结构多样。有几种工具(n = 4)报告了所有心理测量特性,但未报告可解释性。一种工具,即修订后的压力相关成长量表,还报告了与另一种益处发现工具的相关统计数据。根据所提供的信息,许多工具的心理测量严谨性尚未确立。
有一种工具报告了所有已确定标准的验证统计数据。虽然现有工具提供了益处发现概念的一系列操作化方式,并且在先前研究中或多或少都有使用,但大多数仍处于开发早期阶段,需要在成年癌症患者群体中进行进一步的验证工作。鉴于对益处发现在临床实践中作用的兴趣日益增加,敦促研究人员进一步使用这些工具,并在使用时报告相关的验证统计数据。