{"title":"评估繁体中文版癌症幸存者自我效能感量表的心理测量特性。","authors":"Ching-Hui Chien, Cheng-Keng Chuang, Chun-Te Wu, See-Tong Pang, Kuan-Lin Liu, Kai-Jie Yu","doi":"10.1186/s41155-024-00317-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The reliability and validity of the traditional Chinese version of the Cancer Survivors' Self-Efficacy Scale (CS-SES-TC) has not been assessed.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the psychometric properties of the Traditional Chinese version of the CS-SES-TC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were recruited from the outpatient departments of a hospital in Taiwan. A single questionnaire was administered to 300 genitourinary cancer survivors. The scales included in the initial questionnaire were the CS-SES-TC, the General Self-Efficacy Scale, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scale (FACT-G). Data obtained from 300 survivors were used to confirm the structure through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The CFA results indicate that the 11-item CS-SES-TC is consistent with the original scale. Furthermore, it was identified as a unidimensional scale, with the model showing acceptable goodness-of-fit (CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.97). The factor loading of each item in the CS-SES-TC was above 0.6 and had convergent validity. Based on multiple-group CFA testing, the change (ΔCFI) between the unconstrained and constrained models was ≤ 0.01, indicating that measurement invariance holds for gender. The participants' CS-SES-TC scores were positively correlated with their FACT-G scores and negatively correlated with their CES-D scores. The scales exhibited concurrent validity and discriminant validity. The CS-SES-TC had a Cronbach's α in the range of .97-.98.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CS-SES-TC had acceptable reliability and validity. Healthcare workers can use this scale for ongoing assessment of the cancer-related self-efficacy of cancer survivors.</p>","PeriodicalId":46901,"journal":{"name":"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica","volume":"37 1","pages":"33"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11343950/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of the psychometric properties of the traditional Chinese version of the cancer survivors' self-efficacy scale.\",\"authors\":\"Ching-Hui Chien, Cheng-Keng Chuang, Chun-Te Wu, See-Tong Pang, Kuan-Lin Liu, Kai-Jie Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41155-024-00317-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The reliability and validity of the traditional Chinese version of the Cancer Survivors' Self-Efficacy Scale (CS-SES-TC) has not been assessed.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the psychometric properties of the Traditional Chinese version of the CS-SES-TC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were recruited from the outpatient departments of a hospital in Taiwan. A single questionnaire was administered to 300 genitourinary cancer survivors. The scales included in the initial questionnaire were the CS-SES-TC, the General Self-Efficacy Scale, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scale (FACT-G). Data obtained from 300 survivors were used to confirm the structure through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The CFA results indicate that the 11-item CS-SES-TC is consistent with the original scale. Furthermore, it was identified as a unidimensional scale, with the model showing acceptable goodness-of-fit (CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.97). The factor loading of each item in the CS-SES-TC was above 0.6 and had convergent validity. Based on multiple-group CFA testing, the change (ΔCFI) between the unconstrained and constrained models was ≤ 0.01, indicating that measurement invariance holds for gender. The participants' CS-SES-TC scores were positively correlated with their FACT-G scores and negatively correlated with their CES-D scores. The scales exhibited concurrent validity and discriminant validity. The CS-SES-TC had a Cronbach's α in the range of .97-.98.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CS-SES-TC had acceptable reliability and validity. Healthcare workers can use this scale for ongoing assessment of the cancer-related self-efficacy of cancer survivors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"33\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11343950/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-024-00317-y\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-024-00317-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessment of the psychometric properties of the traditional Chinese version of the cancer survivors' self-efficacy scale.
Background: The reliability and validity of the traditional Chinese version of the Cancer Survivors' Self-Efficacy Scale (CS-SES-TC) has not been assessed.
Objective: To assess the psychometric properties of the Traditional Chinese version of the CS-SES-TC.
Methods: Participants were recruited from the outpatient departments of a hospital in Taiwan. A single questionnaire was administered to 300 genitourinary cancer survivors. The scales included in the initial questionnaire were the CS-SES-TC, the General Self-Efficacy Scale, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scale (FACT-G). Data obtained from 300 survivors were used to confirm the structure through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
Results: The CFA results indicate that the 11-item CS-SES-TC is consistent with the original scale. Furthermore, it was identified as a unidimensional scale, with the model showing acceptable goodness-of-fit (CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.97). The factor loading of each item in the CS-SES-TC was above 0.6 and had convergent validity. Based on multiple-group CFA testing, the change (ΔCFI) between the unconstrained and constrained models was ≤ 0.01, indicating that measurement invariance holds for gender. The participants' CS-SES-TC scores were positively correlated with their FACT-G scores and negatively correlated with their CES-D scores. The scales exhibited concurrent validity and discriminant validity. The CS-SES-TC had a Cronbach's α in the range of .97-.98.
Conclusion: The CS-SES-TC had acceptable reliability and validity. Healthcare workers can use this scale for ongoing assessment of the cancer-related self-efficacy of cancer survivors.
期刊介绍:
Psicologia: Reflexão & Crítica is a journal published three times a year by Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia do Desenvolvimento (Psychology Graduate Program) of the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul - UFRGS (Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul). Its objective is to publish original works in the psychology field: articles, short reports on research and reviews as well as to present to the scientific community texts which reflect a significant contribution for the psychology field. The short title of the journal is Psicol. Refl. Crít. It must be used regarding bibliographies, footnotes, as well as bibliographical strips and references.