Cargando…

Evaluation of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools in cancer patients: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND: Although a wide range of needs assessment tools for cancer patients have been developed, no standardized and commonly accepted instruments were recommended to use in clinical care. This systematic review was conducted to assess the quality of psychometric properties of needs assessment t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tian, Lang, Cao, Xiaoyi, Feng, Xielin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6324833/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30620770
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210242
_version_ 1783386040479776768
author Tian, Lang
Cao, Xiaoyi
Feng, Xielin
author_facet Tian, Lang
Cao, Xiaoyi
Feng, Xielin
author_sort Tian, Lang
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although a wide range of needs assessment tools for cancer patients have been developed, no standardized and commonly accepted instruments were recommended to use in clinical care. This systematic review was conducted to assess the quality of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools among cancer patients in order to help oncology healthcare professionals select the most appropriate needs assessment tools in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Searches were conducted in the electronic databases of PUBMED from 1966, CINAHL from 1960, EMBASE from 1980 and PsychINFO from 1967 as well as additional sources. The quality of psychometric properties of the recruited needs assessment tools was evaluated using the agreed quality criteria for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies which evaluated the psychometric properties of 20 needs assessment tools were identified. Internal consistency was tested in 32 studies with 9 studies indicating negative rating and 4 studies intermediate rating. Less than half of the studies (13 studies) assessed test-retest reliability, and only 4 studies reported positive rating. Content validity was the most tested psychometric property appraised in 33 studies and indicated positive rating in all the evaluated studies. Structural validity was adequately evaluated in 28 studies with 23 studies reporting intermediate rating. More than half of the studies (29 studies) tested hypothesis testing and 13 studies were rated positive. Cross-cultural validity results were obtained in 13 studies with 7 studies showing negative rating. No data was available on measurement error and criterion validity. Only one study appraised responsiveness and showed intermediate rating. The Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form (SCNS-SF) is the most widely used instrument for needs assessment in cancer patients. It had strong evidence for internal consistency, content validity, structural validity and hypothesis testing, and moderate evidence for reliability and cross-cultural validity. Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs Measure (CaSUN) reported strong or moderate evidence for internal consistency, reliability, content and structural validity, and hypothesis testing. Furthermore, Supportive Cancer Care Needs Assessment Tool for Indigenous People (SCNAT-IP) had strong evidence for content validity, and moderate evidence for internal consistency, structural validity and hypothesis testing. CONCLUSIONS: Despite several needs assessment tools exist to assess care needs in cancer patients, further improvement of already existing and promising instruments is recommended.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6324833
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63248332019-01-19 Evaluation of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools in cancer patients: A systematic literature review Tian, Lang Cao, Xiaoyi Feng, Xielin PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Although a wide range of needs assessment tools for cancer patients have been developed, no standardized and commonly accepted instruments were recommended to use in clinical care. This systematic review was conducted to assess the quality of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools among cancer patients in order to help oncology healthcare professionals select the most appropriate needs assessment tools in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Searches were conducted in the electronic databases of PUBMED from 1966, CINAHL from 1960, EMBASE from 1980 and PsychINFO from 1967 as well as additional sources. The quality of psychometric properties of the recruited needs assessment tools was evaluated using the agreed quality criteria for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies which evaluated the psychometric properties of 20 needs assessment tools were identified. Internal consistency was tested in 32 studies with 9 studies indicating negative rating and 4 studies intermediate rating. Less than half of the studies (13 studies) assessed test-retest reliability, and only 4 studies reported positive rating. Content validity was the most tested psychometric property appraised in 33 studies and indicated positive rating in all the evaluated studies. Structural validity was adequately evaluated in 28 studies with 23 studies reporting intermediate rating. More than half of the studies (29 studies) tested hypothesis testing and 13 studies were rated positive. Cross-cultural validity results were obtained in 13 studies with 7 studies showing negative rating. No data was available on measurement error and criterion validity. Only one study appraised responsiveness and showed intermediate rating. The Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form (SCNS-SF) is the most widely used instrument for needs assessment in cancer patients. It had strong evidence for internal consistency, content validity, structural validity and hypothesis testing, and moderate evidence for reliability and cross-cultural validity. Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs Measure (CaSUN) reported strong or moderate evidence for internal consistency, reliability, content and structural validity, and hypothesis testing. Furthermore, Supportive Cancer Care Needs Assessment Tool for Indigenous People (SCNAT-IP) had strong evidence for content validity, and moderate evidence for internal consistency, structural validity and hypothesis testing. CONCLUSIONS: Despite several needs assessment tools exist to assess care needs in cancer patients, further improvement of already existing and promising instruments is recommended. Public Library of Science 2019-01-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6324833/ /pubmed/30620770 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210242 Text en © 2019 Tian et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Tian, Lang
Cao, Xiaoyi
Feng, Xielin
Evaluation of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools in cancer patients: A systematic literature review
title Evaluation of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools in cancer patients: A systematic literature review
title_full Evaluation of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools in cancer patients: A systematic literature review
title_fullStr Evaluation of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools in cancer patients: A systematic literature review
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools in cancer patients: A systematic literature review
title_short Evaluation of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools in cancer patients: A systematic literature review
title_sort evaluation of psychometric properties of needs assessment tools in cancer patients: a systematic literature review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6324833/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30620770
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210242
work_keys_str_mv AT tianlang evaluationofpsychometricpropertiesofneedsassessmenttoolsincancerpatientsasystematicliteraturereview
AT caoxiaoyi evaluationofpsychometricpropertiesofneedsassessmenttoolsincancerpatientsasystematicliteraturereview
AT fengxielin evaluationofpsychometricpropertiesofneedsassessmenttoolsincancerpatientsasystematicliteraturereview