• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

不同人群直觉性癌症风险感知的测量不变性:风险量表中的认知因果关系和负性情绪。

Measurement invariance of intuitive cancer risk perceptions across diverse populations: The Cognitive Causation and Negative Affect in Risk scales.

机构信息

1 Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, USA.

2 Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA.

出版信息

J Health Psychol. 2019 Aug;24(9):1221-1232. doi: 10.1177/1359105317693910. Epub 2017 Feb 1.

DOI:10.1177/1359105317693910
PMID:28810422
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7906483/
Abstract

Intuitive cancer risk perceptions may inform strategies to motivate cancer prevention behaviors. This study evaluated factor structure and measurement invariance of two new measures of intuitive cancer risk, the Cognitive Causation and Negative Affect in Risk scales. Single- and multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis models were fit to responses from three diverse samples. The confirmatory factor analysis models fit the data well, with all comparative fit indices (CFI) ≥ 0.94. Items flagged by chi-square difference tests as potentially non-invariant were largely invariant between samples according to practical fit indices (e.g. ΔCFI). These novel scales may be particularly relevant in diverse, underserved populations.

摘要

直观的癌症风险感知可能为激励癌症预防行为的策略提供信息。本研究评估了两种新的直观癌症风险测量方法的因素结构和测量不变性,即认知因果关系和风险的消极影响量表。单组和多组验证性因子分析模型适用于三个不同样本的反应。验证性因子分析模型很好地拟合了数据,所有比较拟合指数(CFI)≥0.94。根据实用拟合指数(例如ΔCFI),通过卡方差异检验标记为潜在不变的项目在样本之间基本不变。这些新的量表在多样化、服务不足的人群中可能特别相关。

相似文献

1
Measurement invariance of intuitive cancer risk perceptions across diverse populations: The Cognitive Causation and Negative Affect in Risk scales.不同人群直觉性癌症风险感知的测量不变性:风险量表中的认知因果关系和负性情绪。
J Health Psychol. 2019 Aug;24(9):1221-1232. doi: 10.1177/1359105317693910. Epub 2017 Feb 1.
2
Measurement invariance of the Intuitive Eating Scale-2 across country, ethnicity, sex, and sexual orientation: A cross-cultural study between Brazil and the U.S.跨国家、种族、性别和性取向的直觉饮食量表-2 的测量不变性:巴西和美国之间的跨文化研究
Eat Behav. 2024 Aug;54:101904. doi: 10.1016/j.eatbeh.2024.101904. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
3
Validation of the psychometric properties of cognitive fusion questionnaire. A study of the factorial validity and factorial invariance of the measure among osteoarticular disease, diabetes mellitus, obesity, depressive disorder, and general populations.认知融合问卷的心理计量特性验证。在骨关节炎疾病、糖尿病、肥胖、抑郁障碍和一般人群中对该测量方法的因子有效性和因子不变性的研究。
Clin Psychol Psychother. 2017 Sep;24(5):1121-1129. doi: 10.1002/cpp.2077. Epub 2017 Feb 14.
4
Assessing measurement invariance of MSQOL-54 across Italian and English versions.评估 MSQOL-54 在意大利用英文和英文版之间的测量不变性。
Qual Life Res. 2020 Mar;29(3):783-791. doi: 10.1007/s11136-019-02352-0. Epub 2019 Nov 9.
5
Validation and Invariance of the Dental Anxiety Scale in a Brazilian sample.巴西样本中牙科焦虑量表的效度与不变性
Braz Oral Res. 2016 Dec 22;30(1):e138. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2016.vol30.0138.
6
Gender-based measurement invariance of the substance use risk profile scale.基于性别的物质使用风险概况量表的测量不变性。
Addict Behav. 2014 Mar;39(3):690-4. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.10.016. Epub 2013 Nov 7.
7
Dimensional structure, psychometric properties, and sex and ethnic invariance of a Bahasa Malaysia (Malay) translation of the Intuitive Eating Scale-2 (IES-2).直观饮食量表-2(IES-2)马来语(马来西亚语)翻译版的维度结构、心理测量特性以及性别和种族不变性。
Body Image. 2020 Mar;32:167-179. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.01.003. Epub 2020 Jan 22.
8
The Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ) in the general population: scale structure, reliability, measurement invariance and normative data: a cross-sectional survey.一般人群中的四维症状问卷(4DSQ):量表结构、信度、测量不变性及常模数据:一项横断面调查
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016 Sep 15;14(1):130. doi: 10.1186/s12955-016-0533-4.
9
Factor structure and longitudinal invariance of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) in adult women: application in a population-based sample of mothers of children with epilepsy.成人女性流行病学研究抑郁量表(CES-D)的因子结构和纵向不变性:在儿童癫痫患者母亲的基于人群样本中的应用。
Arch Womens Ment Health. 2013 Apr;16(2):159-66. doi: 10.1007/s00737-013-0331-5. Epub 2013 Feb 19.
10
Factorial invariance of child self-report across socioeconomic status groups: a multigroup confirmatory factor analysis utilizing the PedsQL 4.0 Generic Core Scales.儿童自我报告在社会经济地位群体间的因素不变性:使用儿童生活质量量表4.0通用核心量表的多组验证性因素分析
J Behav Med. 2008 Oct;31(5):401-11. doi: 10.1007/s10865-008-9166-3. Epub 2008 Jul 8.

引用本文的文献

1
Identifying Mediators of Intervention Effects Within a Randomized Controlled Trial to Motivate Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment Among Breast and Ovarian Cancer Survivors.在一项随机对照试验中识别干预效果的中介因素,以激励乳腺癌和卵巢癌幸存者进行癌症遗传风险评估。
Ann Behav Med. 2023 Oct 16;57(11):965-977. doi: 10.1093/abm/kaad048.
2
Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow.提高偏远地区癌症遗传风险评估的接受度:定制风险沟通和导航干预的大效应量,但仍有增长空间。
J Clin Oncol. 2023 May 20;41(15):2767-2778. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.00751. Epub 2023 Feb 14.
3

本文引用的文献

1
What do people fear about cancer? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of cancer fears in the general population.人们对癌症有哪些恐惧?一项关于普通人群癌症恐惧的系统评价与元综合分析。
Psychooncology. 2017 Aug;26(8):1070-1079. doi: 10.1002/pon.4287. Epub 2016 Oct 6.
2
The reliability of psychological instruments in community samples: A cautionary note.社区样本中心理测量工具的可靠性:一则警示说明。
J Health Psychol. 2016 Sep;21(9):2033-41. doi: 10.1177/1359105315569859. Epub 2015 Feb 20.
3
Cancer beliefs and patient activation in a diverse, multilingual primary care sample.
Understanding cancer genetic risk assessment motivations in a remote tailored risk communication and navigation intervention randomized controlled trial.
在一项远程定制风险沟通与导航干预随机对照试验中理解癌症遗传风险评估的动机。
Health Psychol Behav Med. 2022 Dec 9;10(1):1190-1215. doi: 10.1080/21642850.2022.2150623. eCollection 2022.
4
Effect of Superstitious Beliefs and Risk Intuitions on Genetic Test Decisions.迷信信仰和风险直觉对基因检测决策的影响。
Med Decis Making. 2022 Apr;42(3):398-403. doi: 10.1177/0272989X211029272. Epub 2021 Aug 28.
5
Examining strategies for addressing high levels of 'I don't know' responding to risk perception questions for colorectal cancer and diabetes: an experimental investigation.探讨针对结直肠癌和糖尿病风险感知问题中“我不知道”高应答率的应对策略:一项实验研究。
Psychol Health. 2021 Jul;36(7):862-878. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2020.1788714. Epub 2020 Sep 2.
6
Lay beliefs about risk: relation to risk behaviors and to probabilistic risk perceptions.风险观念:与风险行为和概率风险认知的关系。
J Behav Med. 2019 Dec;42(6):1062-1072. doi: 10.1007/s10865-019-00036-1. Epub 2019 May 15.
7
Cancer beliefs and patient activation in a diverse, multilingual primary care sample.多样化多语言初级保健样本中的癌症认知与患者积极性
Psychooncology. 2016 Sep;25(9):1071-8. doi: 10.1002/pon.4196. Epub 2016 Aug 1.
多样化多语言初级保健样本中的癌症认知与患者积极性
Psychooncology. 2016 Sep;25(9):1071-8. doi: 10.1002/pon.4196. Epub 2016 Aug 1.
4
Does colorectal cancer risk perception predict screening behavior? A systematic review and meta-analysis.结直肠癌风险认知能否预测筛查行为?一项系统评价与荟萃分析。
J Behav Med. 2015 Dec;38(6):837-50. doi: 10.1007/s10865-015-9668-8. Epub 2015 Aug 18.
5
Deliberative and intuitive risk perceptions as predictors of colorectal cancer screening over time.作为结直肠癌筛查随时间变化预测因素的审慎性和直觉性风险认知
J Behav Med. 2016 Feb;39(1):65-74. doi: 10.1007/s10865-015-9667-9. Epub 2015 Aug 18.
6
Examining Intuitive Cancer Risk Perceptions in Haitian-Creole and Spanish-Speaking Populations.审视海地克里奥尔语和西班牙语人群对癌症风险的直观认知。
J Transcult Nurs. 2016 Jul;27(4):368-75. doi: 10.1177/1043659614561679. Epub 2014 Dec 9.
7
Examining intuitive risk perceptions for cancer in diverse populations.研究不同人群对癌症的直观风险认知。
Health Risk Soc. 2014 Jan 1;16(3):227-242. doi: 10.1080/13698575.2014.911822.
8
Intention to undergo colonoscopy screening among relatives of colorectal cancer cases: a theory-based model.结直肠癌病例亲属接受结肠镜检查筛查的意向:基于理论的模型
Ann Behav Med. 2014 Jun;47(3):280-91. doi: 10.1007/s12160-013-9562-y.
9
Does heightening risk appraisals change people's intentions and behavior? A meta-analysis of experimental studies.提高风险评估是否会改变人们的意图和行为?实验研究的元分析。
Psychol Bull. 2014 Mar;140(2):511-43. doi: 10.1037/a0033065. Epub 2013 Jun 3.
10
Risk perception measures' associations with behavior intentions, affect, and cognition following colon cancer screening messages.结直肠癌筛查信息传播后,风险感知测量与行为意向、情感和认知的关系。
Health Psychol. 2012 Jan;31(1):106-13. doi: 10.1037/a0024787. Epub 2011 Aug 1.