Development and validation of the cancer self-perceived discrimination scale for Chinese cancer patients
- PMID: 30107802
- PMCID: PMC6092871
- DOI: 10.1186/s12955-018-0984-x
Development and validation of the cancer self-perceived discrimination scale for Chinese cancer patients
Abstract
Background: To develop a Cancer Self-Perceived Discrimination Scale (CSPDS) for Chinese cancer patients and to assess its reliability and validity.
Method: A total of 178 patients were recruited and the classical test theory was used to develop the CSPDS. Item analysis was adapted to improve the preliminary version of the CSPDS, then the reliability, the validity and the acceptability of the final version of CSPDS were assessed.
Results: This CSPDS contained 14 items classified into 3 subscales: social withdrawal with 7 items, stigma with 4 and self-deprecation with 3. Good validity (χ2/df = 1.216, GFI = 0.935, AGFI = 0.903, I-CVIs> 0.80) and good reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.829, Spearman-Brown coefficient = 0.827, test-retest reliability coefficient = 0.944) were found. The completion time was 6.06 ± 1.80 min. Participants who were female and reported poor self-rated health tended to have higher CSPDS scores (P < 0.05).
Conclusions: The results indicated that this CSPDS could be used to assess the level of self-perceived discrimination and to preliminarily screen perceived discrimination among Chinese cancer patients, especially in Southwest China. It may provide a basis for scientific assessment of targeted patient education, psychological counseling, social interventions, and psychotherapy in the future.
Keywords: Cancer self-perceived discrimination scale; Psychological problems; Self-perceived discrimination.
Conflict of interest statement
Ethics approval and consent to participate
This study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University. Its procedure followed the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants provided a written informed consent form prior to the study.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Figures
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous
