COVID-19前癌症患者和幸存者的社会隔离和孤独感评估:系统回顾

IF 2 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL International Journal of Behavioral Medicine Pub Date : 2024-05-10 DOI:10.1007/s12529-024-10286-2
Allison Marziliano, Alla Byakova, Priya Patel, Saori W Herman, Michael A Diefenbach
{"title":"COVID-19前癌症患者和幸存者的社会隔离和孤独感评估:系统回顾","authors":"Allison Marziliano, Alla Byakova, Priya Patel, Saori W Herman, Michael A Diefenbach","doi":"10.1007/s12529-024-10286-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the context of cancer research, identifying social isolation and loneliness is a priority given how both exacerbate poor outcomes and lead to increased mortality in oncological populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify all quantitative instruments that have been used to assess either social isolation or loneliness in patients previously or currently diagnosed with cancer in the pre-COVID-19 period.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>PubMed (Web), Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched on August 22, 2019. All databases were searched from inception with no filters applied. The search strategies included terms that captured the following concepts: instruments/tools, social isolation or loneliness, and cancer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 289 titles/abstracts were returned. Upon review, 114 titles/abstracts were deemed to be potentially eligible and the full text was retrieved. Of the 114 full texts, 69 articles met inclusion criteria and comprised the final sample. Publications span years 1980 through 2019, with the majority (71%) occurring in the last decade prior to this review, between 2009 and 2019. Average age of the study samples, with few exceptions, was often over 50 years old. Many studies used all-female samples, while only one study used an all-male sample. The most common cancer diagnosis of participants was breast cancer. The most common measure was the UCLA Loneliness Scale, used in 22 studies. Most measures we identified were used only once, and 11 measures were used 2-3 times. When the information was given, response ranges were always Likert-type scales most often ranging from 1-4 or 1-5, and sometimes from 1-10 possible response options. In terms of psychometrics, test-retest reliability and validity were rarely reported; by contrast, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was reported more than half of the time (60.9%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When selecting a measure to assess loneliness in cancer populations, the UCLA Loneliness Scale is both psychometrically strong and versatile across patients with different cancers, ages, and racial backgrounds. When selecting a measure to assess social isolation in cancer populations, both the PROMIS-SF V 2.0 social isolation and the Berkman-Syme Network Index are brief and have been used in patients with non-White racial backgrounds.</p>","PeriodicalId":54208,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Behavioral Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Assessment of Social Isolation and Loneliness in Cancer Patients and Survivors in the Pre-COVID-19 Period: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Allison Marziliano, Alla Byakova, Priya Patel, Saori W Herman, Michael A Diefenbach\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12529-024-10286-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the context of cancer research, identifying social isolation and loneliness is a priority given how both exacerbate poor outcomes and lead to increased mortality in oncological populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify all quantitative instruments that have been used to assess either social isolation or loneliness in patients previously or currently diagnosed with cancer in the pre-COVID-19 period.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>PubMed (Web), Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched on August 22, 2019. All databases were searched from inception with no filters applied. The search strategies included terms that captured the following concepts: instruments/tools, social isolation or loneliness, and cancer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 289 titles/abstracts were returned. Upon review, 114 titles/abstracts were deemed to be potentially eligible and the full text was retrieved. Of the 114 full texts, 69 articles met inclusion criteria and comprised the final sample. Publications span years 1980 through 2019, with the majority (71%) occurring in the last decade prior to this review, between 2009 and 2019. Average age of the study samples, with few exceptions, was often over 50 years old. Many studies used all-female samples, while only one study used an all-male sample. The most common cancer diagnosis of participants was breast cancer. The most common measure was the UCLA Loneliness Scale, used in 22 studies. Most measures we identified were used only once, and 11 measures were used 2-3 times. When the information was given, response ranges were always Likert-type scales most often ranging from 1-4 or 1-5, and sometimes from 1-10 possible response options. In terms of psychometrics, test-retest reliability and validity were rarely reported; by contrast, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was reported more than half of the time (60.9%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When selecting a measure to assess loneliness in cancer populations, the UCLA Loneliness Scale is both psychometrically strong and versatile across patients with different cancers, ages, and racial backgrounds. When selecting a measure to assess social isolation in cancer populations, both the PROMIS-SF V 2.0 social isolation and the Berkman-Syme Network Index are brief and have been used in patients with non-White racial backgrounds.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54208,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Behavioral Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Behavioral Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-024-10286-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-024-10286-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在癌症研究中,考虑到社会隔离和孤独感会加剧肿瘤患者的不良预后并导致死亡率上升,因此确定社会隔离和孤独感是一项优先工作。本系统性综述的目的是确定在 COVID-19 之前的时期内用于评估先前或目前被诊断为癌症患者的社会隔离或孤独感的所有定量工具:于2019年8月22日检索了PubMed(Web)、Scopus、CINAHL和PsycINFO。所有数据库均从一开始就进行了检索,未使用任何筛选条件。检索策略包括包含以下概念的术语:工具/手段、社会隔离或孤独以及癌症:结果:共检索到 289 篇标题/摘要。经审查,114 篇标题/摘要被认为可能符合条件,并检索了全文。在这 114 篇全文中,69 篇符合纳入标准,成为最终样本。文章发表时间跨度为 1980 年至 2019 年,其中大部分(71%)发生在本次研究之前的最近十年,即 2009 年至 2019 年之间。研究样本的平均年龄通常超过 50 岁,只有少数例外。许多研究使用了全女性样本,只有一项研究使用了全男性样本。参与者最常见的癌症诊断是乳腺癌。最常见的测量方法是加州大学洛杉矶分校孤独感量表,有 22 项研究使用了该量表。我们发现的大多数测量方法只使用过一次,有 11 种测量方法使用过 2-3 次。在提供信息时,回答范围总是采用李克特量表,最常见的范围是 1-4 或 1-5,有时也有 1-10 个可能的回答选项。在心理测量学方面,很少有关于重复测试信度和效度的报告;相比之下,有一半以上的报告(60.9%)提到了内部一致性(克朗巴赫α):结论:在选择评估癌症患者孤独感的量表时,加州大学洛杉矶分校孤独感量表在心理统计学上具有很强的通用性,适用于不同癌症、年龄和种族背景的患者。在选择评估癌症患者社交孤独感的量表时,PROMIS-SF V 2.0社交孤独感量表和Berkman-Syme网络指数都很简短,并已用于非白人种族背景的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Assessment of Social Isolation and Loneliness in Cancer Patients and Survivors in the Pre-COVID-19 Period: A Systematic Review.

Background: In the context of cancer research, identifying social isolation and loneliness is a priority given how both exacerbate poor outcomes and lead to increased mortality in oncological populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify all quantitative instruments that have been used to assess either social isolation or loneliness in patients previously or currently diagnosed with cancer in the pre-COVID-19 period.

Method: PubMed (Web), Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched on August 22, 2019. All databases were searched from inception with no filters applied. The search strategies included terms that captured the following concepts: instruments/tools, social isolation or loneliness, and cancer.

Results: A total of 289 titles/abstracts were returned. Upon review, 114 titles/abstracts were deemed to be potentially eligible and the full text was retrieved. Of the 114 full texts, 69 articles met inclusion criteria and comprised the final sample. Publications span years 1980 through 2019, with the majority (71%) occurring in the last decade prior to this review, between 2009 and 2019. Average age of the study samples, with few exceptions, was often over 50 years old. Many studies used all-female samples, while only one study used an all-male sample. The most common cancer diagnosis of participants was breast cancer. The most common measure was the UCLA Loneliness Scale, used in 22 studies. Most measures we identified were used only once, and 11 measures were used 2-3 times. When the information was given, response ranges were always Likert-type scales most often ranging from 1-4 or 1-5, and sometimes from 1-10 possible response options. In terms of psychometrics, test-retest reliability and validity were rarely reported; by contrast, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was reported more than half of the time (60.9%).

Conclusion: When selecting a measure to assess loneliness in cancer populations, the UCLA Loneliness Scale is both psychometrically strong and versatile across patients with different cancers, ages, and racial backgrounds. When selecting a measure to assess social isolation in cancer populations, both the PROMIS-SF V 2.0 social isolation and the Berkman-Syme Network Index are brief and have been used in patients with non-White racial backgrounds.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Behavioral Medicine (IJBM) is the official scientific journal of the International Society for Behavioral Medicine (ISBM). IJBM seeks to present the best theoretically-driven, evidence-based work in the field of behavioral medicine from around the globe. IJBM embraces multiple theoretical perspectives, research methodologies, groups of interest, and levels of analysis. The journal is interested in research across the broad spectrum of behavioral medicine, including health-behavior relationships, the prevention of illness and the promotion of health, the effects of illness on the self and others, the effectiveness of novel interventions, identification of biobehavioral mechanisms, and the influence of social factors on health. We welcome experimental, non-experimental, quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies as well as implementation and dissemination research, integrative reviews, and meta-analyses.
期刊最新文献
Post-traumatic Distress in Adults with Congenital Heart Disease: Protective Factors and Clinical Implications. The Influence of Sex and Gender on the Level and Course of Subjective Cognitive Complaints After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Advancing Behavioral Medicine: The International Pursuit of Science for 30 Years. Transdiagnostic Risk Factors for Reasons for Smoking: Evaluating the Concurrent Role of Distress Tolerance and Anxiety Sensitivity. Understanding Community-Specific Health Behaviors to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes and Depression in Rural Adolescents: A Qualitative Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1