Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Lung cancer screening is a recent recommendation for long-term smokers. Understanding individual health beliefs about screening is a critical component in future efforts to facilitate patient-provider conversations about screening participation.The aim of this study was to describe the development and psychometric testing of 4 new scales to measure lung cancer screening health beliefs (perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, self-efficacy).In phase I, 4 scales were developed from extensive literature review, item modification from existing Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening Health Belief Scales, focus groups with long-term smokers, and evaluation/feedback from a panel of 10 content experts. In phase II, we conducted a survey of 497 long-term smokers to assess the final scales' reliability and validity.Phase I: content validity was established with the content expert panel. Phase II: internal consistency reliability of the scales was supported with Cronbach's ?'s ranging from .88 to .92. Construct validity was established with confirmatory factor analysis and testing for differences between screeners and nonscreeners in theoretically proposed directions.Initial testing supports the scales are valid and reliable. These new scales can help investigators identify long-term smokers more likely to screen for lung cancer and are useful for the development and testing of behavioral interventions regarding lung cancer screening.Development of effective interventions to enhance shared decision making about lung cancer screening between patients and providers must first identify factors influencing the individual's screening participation. Future efforts facilitating patient-provider conversations are better informed by understanding the perspective of the individual making the decision.
<h4>Background</h4>Lung cancer screening is a recent recommendation for long-term smokers. Understanding individual health beliefs about screening is a critical component in future efforts to facilitate patient-provider conversations about screening participation.<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study was to describe the development and psychometric testing of 4 new scales to measure lung cancer screening health beliefs (perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, self-efficacy).<h4 ...[more]
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aims to explore health beliefs toward lung cancer screening with low dose computed tomography among Chinese American high-risk smokers.MethodsGuided by the Health Belief Model, semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with Chinese American high-risk smokers via phone. Additional questionnaires on demographic information, history of smoking and lung cancer screening were collected via email or phone before the interview, depending on participants' preference. Content analysis was used to extract meaningful and significant themes in the dataset. Constant comparison analysis and process coding were used to categorize and code data.ResultsData saturation was reached after interviewing 12 participants. Chinese American high-risk smokers perceived a low susceptibility to lung cancer, since they believed various protective factors of lung cancer (e.g., doing exercise, healthy diet, etc.) reduced their risk of getting lung cancer. All the participants perceived a high severity of lung cancer. They acknowledged lung cancer would have a huge impact on their life. Perceived benefits of lung cancer screening were accurate in most aspects although minor confusions were still noticed among this population. Perceived barriers varied on participants', physicians', and institutional levels. High-risk Chinese American smokers had little confidence to screening for lung cancer. Cues to action for them to screening for lung cancer included recommendations from health care providers, support from family members and friends, and information shared on Chinese-based social media.ConclusionsMisconceptions and barriers to screening for lung cancer existed widely among Chinese American high-risk smokers. Intervention programs and targeted health education should be implemented to promote lung cancer screening among this population.
Project description:The detection of common mental disorders in humanitarian crisis settings requires a screening tool that is feasible to use as well as sensitive and specific. The Self-Report Questionnaire, developed by the World Health Organization in 1994 to detect presence or absence of common mental health disorders, has frequently been used among conflict-affected and refugee populations. Our goal was to identify a highly predictive and reliable subset of items to serve as a screening tool that can be used in busy, over-crowded, and low-resource primary health care settings to identify women who need mental health attention.We analyzed the responses on a version of the Self-Report Questionnaire expanded to include two suicidality items from 810 displaced women living in refugee camps in Rwanda. Screening items were selected and evaluated for predictive ability using logistic regression in a cross-validation process, sensitivity and specificity using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and internal consistency analysis.A five-item screening tool resulted. Those items are "Do you feel unhappy?", Do you feel easily nervous, tense, or worried?", "Have you lost interest in things?", "Do you have trouble thinking clearly?" and "Has the thought of ending your life been on your mind?".The Self-Report Questionnaire-5 may be an important tool for identifying common mental disorders as well as suicide ideation and behaviors when assessing mental health among women in crisis situations. Further evaluation of this tool is warranted.
Project description:ObjectiveA healthy lifestyle includes health protective and health promoting behaviors. Health promoting lifestyle profiles have been developed, but measures of health protective behavior are still lacking. This study sought to develop a health protecting behavior scale.MethodsAn initial item pool for the Health Protective Behavior Scale (HPBS) was generated based on read and referred literature and a single-item open-ended survey. An expert group screened this initial item pool using an item-level content validity index. Pilot testing was conducted. The degree of variation, the response rate, the item-total correlation coefficient, and the factor loading in factor analysis and item analysis were used to screen items using data of pilot testing. 454 subjects were recruited evaluate the psychometric properties of the HPBS. Analyses included internal consistency, test-retest reliability, factor analysis, parallel analysis, correlation analysis and criterion validity analysis.ResultsThe final iteration of the HPBS was developed with 32 items and five dimensions: interpersonal support, general behavior, self-knowledge, nutrition behavior and health care. Cronbach's alpha coefficient, and test-retest reliability were 0.89 and 0.89 respectively. Correlation coefficients of the five dimensions ranged from 0.28 to 0.55. The Spearman correlation coefficient between the total scores on the WHOQOL-BREF and on the HPBS was 0.34.ConclusionsHPBS has sufficient validity and reliability to measure health protective behaviors in adults.
Project description:BACKGROUND:computer-based screenings are usually used for early detection of a child's mental development problems. However, there are no such screenings in Russia yet. This study aimed to elaborate scales for rapid monitoring of mental development of 3-year-olds. METHODS:863 children took part in the study, among them 814 children of the group Norm, 49 children with developmental delay (DD), including 23 children with symptoms of autistic spectrum disorder (ASD). The multifactor study of mental development tool was used as a part of a software complex for longitudinal research for data collection. This study used a set of 233 tasks that were adequate for 3-year-olds. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was used for the elaboration and factor validation of the scales. The structure of the relationship between scales and age was refined using structural equation modeling. RESULTS:as a result of the research, screening scales were elaborated: "Logical reasoning", "Motor skills", "General awareness", "Executive functions". The factor validity and reliability of scales were proved. The high discriminability of the scales in distinguishing the "Norm" and "DD" samples was revealed. The developed test norms take into account the child's age in days and allow identifying a "risk group" with an expected forecast accuracy of at least 90%. The obtained scales meet psychometric requirements for their application and allow creating an online screening system for wide application.
Project description:ObjectivesThis study was aimed to develop a health belief model scale for exercise among Chinese residents to describe the relationships between health beliefs and exercise for promoting residents to adopt or maintain exercise programs.MethodsParticipants were from two projects, Project 1 with 3833 participants and Project 2 with 7319 participants. A pool of 21 items was developed based on a small-scale qualitative study about health beliefs of exercise and literature. Internal consistency and construct validity of the scale were evaluated with Cronbach's α coefficient, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and second-order confirmatory factor analysis.ResultsA final version of 18 items loaded on six factors which could explain 60.30-% of variance was observed after EFA. The internal consistency of the final version with 18 items performed in Project 1 was acceptable (0.609). The reliability of the six subscales was good with Cronbach's α coefficient of 0.628, 0.713, 0.628, 0.801, 0.676 and 0.838 for perceived benefits, perceived objective barriers, perceived subjective barriers, self-efficacy, perceived severity and cues to action, respectively. CFA and second-order CFA indicated a good fit to data.ConclusionsThe Health Belief Model Scale for Exercise(HBMS-E) is a valid and reliable instrument to assess health beliefs of exercise among residents in China. Understanding the health beliefs of exercise will help health professionals to develop effective interventions for health and evaluate the effectiveness.
Project description:Background Adolescence is a crucial period for the acquisition of good mental health behaviours, which are the foundation for health and wellbeing in later life. Improved knowledge about mental health and improved help-seeking behaviours have been shown to lead to better mental health outcomes. Mental health literacy (MHL) is multifaceted (e.g., knowledge about symptoms, the stigma around mental health, good mental health practices, etc.). Measures are needed that can assess these different aspects of MHL. Measurement of mental health literacy is currently limited due to a lack of reported psychometric instruments with known psychometric properties. Given that most mental health problems start in early adolescence, a scale is needed that is reliable and valid in this age group. Methods The development and validation of the psychometric instrument (termed the Knowledge and Attitudes to Mental Health Scales: KAMHS) entailed two phases: 1) item generation based on an evidence-based intervention programme: The Guide; and 2) item reduction through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for factor structure and psychometric assessment. Participants were 559 Year 9 pupils in secondary schools across Wales aged between 13 and 14 years. Results Results from the CFA indicated an acceptable fit of the model to the data. The KAMHS showed good internal constancy and moderate test-retest validity (.40–.64). Conclusions The final version of the KAMHS contains 50 items that are appropriate for use in children and adolescents. These results suggest that the KAMHS can be used over time to assess the efficacy of interventions aimed at increasing the mental health literacy of adolescent populations. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-021-02964-x.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Culturally sensitive, reliable and valid cultural belief scales for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in Koreans in the Republic of Korea are not available in the literature. The purpose of this study was to adapt and validate existing cultural belief scales for CRC screening in Koreans. METHODS:Individual interviews, expert reviews, and a pilot test were conducted for instrument adaptation, and a cross-sectional survey with 884 Koreans was conducted for instrument validation. Construct validity using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and reliability of the Korean version of the instruments were examined. RESULTS:Exploratory factor analysis using c four factors that accounted for 48.12% of the variance. The validity and reliability of the cultural belief scales were supported by confirmatory factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha. CONCLUSIONS:The results of the present study showed that the four-factor cultural belief scales were culturally sensitive, reliable and valid in Koreans. The final cultural belief scales could be used to identify cultural beliefs more accurately and specifically, as well as to develop effective interventions to increase CRC screening in Koreans in the Republic of Korea.
Project description:BackgroundThe important role of leaders in the translation of health research is acknowledged in the implementation science literature. However, the accurate measurement of leadership traits and behaviours in health professionals has not been directly addressed. This review aimed to identify whether scales which measure leadership traits and behaviours have been found to be reliable and valid for use with health professionals.MethodsA systematic review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, CINAHL, Scopus, ABI/INFORMIT and Business Source Ultimate were searched to identify publications which reported original research testing the reliability, validity or acceptability of a leadership-related scale with health professionals.ResultsOf 2814 records, a total of 39 studies met the inclusion criteria, from which 33 scales were identified as having undergone some form of psychometric testing with health professionals. The most commonly used was the Implementation Leadership Scale (n = 5) and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (n = 3). Of the 33 scales, the majority of scales were validated in English speaking countries including the USA (n = 15) and Canada (n = 4), but also with some translations and use in Europe and Asia, predominantly with samples of nurses (n = 27) or allied health professionals (n = 10). Only two validation studies included physicians. Content validity and internal consistency were evident for most scales (n = 30 and 29, respectively). Only 20 of the 33 scales were found to satisfy the acceptable thresholds for good construct validity. Very limited testing occurred in relation to test-re-test reliability, responsiveness, acceptability, cross-cultural revalidation, convergent validity, discriminant validity and criterion validity.ConclusionsSeven scales may be sufficiently sound to be used with professionals, primarily with nurses. There is an absence of validation of leadership scales with regard to physicians. Given that physicians, along with nurses and allied health professionals have a leadership role in driving the implementation of evidence-based healthcare, this constitutes a clear gap in the psychometric testing of leadership scales for use in healthcare implementation research and practice.Trial registrationThis review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (see Additional File 1) (PLoS Medicine. 6:e1000097, 2009) and the associated protocol has been registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (Registration Number CRD42019121544 ).
Project description:Compassion has received increasing societal and scientific interest in recent years. The science of compassion requires a tool that can offer valid and reliable measurement of the construct to allow examination of its causes, correlates, and consequences. The current studies developed and examined the psychometric properties of new self-report measures of compassion for others and for the self, the 20-item Sussex-Oxford Compassion for Others Scale (SOCS-O) and 20-item Sussex-Oxford Compassion for the Self Scale (SOCS-S). These were based on the theoretically and empirically supported definition of compassion as comprising five dimensions: (a) recognizing suffering, (b) understanding the universality of suffering, (c) feeling for the person suffering, (d) tolerating uncomfortable feelings, and (e) motivation to act/acting to alleviate suffering. Findings support the five-factor structure for both the SOCS-O and SOCS-S. Scores on both scales showed adequate internal consistency, interpretability, floor/ceiling effects, and convergent and discriminant validity.
Project description:Colorectal cancer screening saves lives and is cost-effective. It allows early detection of the pathology, and enables earlier medical intervention. Despite clinical practice guidelines promoting screening for average risk individuals, uptake remains suboptimal in many populations. Few studies have examined how sociobehavioural factors influence screening uptake in the context of behaviour change theories such as the health belief model. This systematic review therefore examines how the health belief model's constructs are associated with colorectal cancer screening. Four databases were systematically searched from inception to September 2019. Quantitative observational studies that used the health belief model to examine colorectal screening history, intention or behaviour were included. A total of 30 studies met the criteria for review; all were of cross-sectional design. Perceived susceptibility, benefits and cues to action were directly associated with screening history or intention. Perceived barriers inversely associated with screening history or intention. The studies included also found other modifying factors including sociodemographic and cultural norms. Self-report of screening history, intention or behaviour, convenience sampling and lack of temporality among factors were common limitations across studies. The health belief model's associations with colorectal cancer screening uptake was consistent with preventive health behaviours in general. Future studies should examine how theory-based behavioural interventions can be tailored to account for the influence of socioecological factors.
