Hu W, Bao J, Yang X, Ye M. Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the stressors in breast cancer scale: a translation and validation study.
BMC Public Health 2024;
24:425. [PMID:
38336690 PMCID:
PMC10858503 DOI:
10.1186/s12889-024-18000-3]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2023] [Accepted: 02/05/2024] [Indexed: 02/12/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To translate the Stressors in Breast Cancer Scale (SBCS) from English to Chinese and assess its psychometric properties.
METHODS
The Brislin's translation model was applied to perform forward translation, back translation, cross-cultural adaptation, Whereas the Chinese version of the SBCS was formed by conducting pre-testing. A cohort of 878 breast cancer patients participated in this methodological study. Content validity, construct validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and criterion-related validity were used to establish validity. Internal consistency reliability, split-half reliability, and test-retest reliability were used to establish reliability.
RESULTS
The final scale contained five dimensions and 24 items, including interpersonal relationship and healthcare strains, worries and concerns about the future, physical appearance and sex strains, daily difficulties and health. The average content validity index of the scale was 0.975. The goodness-of-fit index (χ2/DF = 2.416, RMSEA = 0.057, GFI = 0.896, CFI = 0.947, IFI = 0.947, and TLI = 0.939) indicated that the model was well-fitted. The composite reliability (CR) of the dimensions ranged from 0.825 to 0.934, the average variance extracted (AVE) ranged from 0.539 to 0.712, and the correlation coefficients of each dimension with the other dimensions were less than the square root of the AVE for that dimension. The Criterion-related validity was 0.511. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.938, and the dimensions ranged from 0.779 to 0.900. Split-half reliability was 0.853, with dimensions ranging from 0.761 to 0.892. Test-retest reliability was 0.855.
CONCLUSIONS
The Chinese version of the SBCS has good reliability and validity, which can be applied to the assessment of stressors in breast cancer patients in China.
Collapse