nach oben

Supportive Care in Cancer

Erschienen in:

01.01.2024 | Review

Assessment tools for stigma in breast cancer patients based on COSMIN guidelines: a systematic review

verfasst von: Xue‐Mei Xie, Jing Gao, Ding‐Xi Bai, Huan Chen, Yue Li

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 1/2024

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the measurement properties and methodological quality of stigma assessment tools designed for breast cancer patients. The aim was to provide clinical medical staff with a foundation for selecting high-quality assessment tools.

Methods

A comprehensive computer search was carried out across various databases, including SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database(VIP), Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and Scopus, which were searched from the inception of the databases until March 20, 2023. Literature screening and data extraction were performed independently by two researchers, adhering to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The assessment tools were evaluated using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) systematic evaluation guidelines.

Results

In the final analysis, a total of 9 assessment tools were included. However, none of these tools addressed measurement error, cross-cultural validity, criterion validity, and responsiveness. Following the COSMIN guidelines, BCSS and CSPDS were assigned to Class A recommendations, while the remaining tools received Class B recommendations.

Conclusion

The BCSS and CSPDS scales demonstrated comprehensive assessment in terms of their measurement characteristics, exhibiting good methodological quality, measurement attribute quality, and supporting evidence. Therefore, it is recommended to utilize these scales for evaluating breast cancer stigma. However, further validation is required for the remaining assessment tools.

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL et al (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71(3):209–249. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660CrossRefPubMed

Zeng H, Chen W, Zheng R et al (2018) Changing cancer survival in China during 2003–15: a pooled analysis of 17 population-based cancer registries. Lancet Glob Health 6(5):e555–e567. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30127-XCrossRefPubMed

Miller KD, Siegel RL, Lin CC et al (2016) Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2016. CA Canc J Clin 66(4):271–289CrossRef

Lovelace DL, McDaniel LR, Golden D (2019) Long-term effects of breast cancer surgery, treatment, and survivor care. J Midwifery Womens Health 64:713–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.13012CrossRefPubMed

Corrigan PW, Kerr A, Knudsen L (2005) The stigma of mental illness: Explanatory models and methods for change. Appl Prev Psychol 11:179–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appsy.2005.07.001CrossRef

Suwankhong D, Liamputtong P (2016) Breast cancer treatment: experiences of changes and social stigma among Thai women in Southern Thailand. Cancer Nurs 39:213–220. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0000000000000255CrossRefPubMed

Bogart LM, Cowgill BO, Kennedy D et al (2008) HIV-related stigma among people with HIV and their families: a qualitative analysis. AIDS Behav 12(2):244–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-007-9231-xCrossRefPubMed

Corrigan PW, Watson AC, Barr L (2006) The self-stigma of mental illness: Implications for self-esteem and self-efficacy. J Soc Clin Psychol 25:875–884. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2006.25.8.875CrossRef

Corrigan PW, Watson AC (2002) The paradox of self-stigma and mental illness. Clin Psychol Sci Pract 9:35. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.9.1.35CrossRef

10.

Jin J (2022) Factors associated with the quality of work life among working breast cancer survivors. Asia-Pac J Oncol Nur 9:97–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apjon.2021.11.005CrossRef

11.

Major B, O’brien LT (2005) The social psychology of stigma. Annu Rev Psychol 56:393–421. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.07013CrossRefPubMed

12.

Chan KK, Mak WW (2014) The mediating role of self-stigma and unmet needs on the recovery of people with schizophrenia living in the community. Qual Life Res 23:2559–2568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0695-7CrossRefPubMed

13.

Bedi M, Devins GM (2016) Cultural considerations for South Asian women with breast cancer. J Cancer Surviv 10(1):31–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-015-0449-8CrossRefPubMed

14.

Al-Qadire M, Alkhawaldeh S (2018) Understanding the perceptions and experiences of Jordanian women towards breast cancer screening. J Cancer Educ 34(2):341–348

15.

Xing G (2013) Buddhist impact on Chinese culture. Asian Philos 23:305–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2013.831606CrossRef

16.

Dolezal L, Lyons B (2017) Health-related shame: an affective determinant of health? Med Humanit 43:257–263. https://doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2017-011186CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Phelan SM, Griffin JM, Jackson GL et al (2013) Stigma, perceived blame, self-blame, and depressive symptoms in men with colorectal cancer. Psychooncology 22(1):65–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.2048CrossRefPubMed

18.

Cho J, Choi EK, Kim SY et al (2013) Association between cancer stigma and depression among cancer survivors: a nationwide survey in Korea. Psychooncology 22(10):2372–2378. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.3302CrossRefPubMed

19.

Holubova M, Prasko J, Ociskova M et al (2019) Quality of life, self-stigma, and coping strategies in patients with neurotic spectrum disorders: a cross-sectional study. Psychol Res Behav Manag 1(12):81–95. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S179838CrossRef

20.

Tang WZ, Yusuf A, Jia K et al (2022) Correlates of stigma for patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer 31(1):55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07506-4CrossRefPubMed

21.

Ernst J, Mehnert A, Dietz A et al (2017) Perceived stigmatization and its impact on quality of life—Results from a large register-based study including breast, colon, prostate and lung cancer patients. BMC Cancer 17:741. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3742-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Tripathi L, Datta SS, Agrawal SK et al (2017) Stigma perceived by women following surgery for breast cancer. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 38:146–152. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijmpo.ijmpo_74_16CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Odigie VI, Tanaka R, Yusufu LM et al (2010) Psychosocial effects of mastectomy on married African women in Northwestern Nigeria. Psychooncology 19(8):893–897. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.1675CrossRefPubMed

24.

Florescu M, Cinteza M, Vinereanu D (2013) Chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity. Maedica (Bucur) 8:59–67PubMed

25.

Jørgensen TL, Hallas J, Friis S et al (2012) Comorbidity in elderly cancer patients in relation to overall and cancer-specific mortality. Br J Cancer 106:1353–1360. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2012.46CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Amini-Tehrani M, Zamanian H, Daryaafzoon M et al (2021) Body image, internalized stigma and enacted stigma predict psychological distress in women with breast cancer: A serial mediation model. J Adv Nurs 77(8):3412–3423CrossRefPubMed

27.

Smith AW, Reeve BB, Bellizzi KM et al (2008) Cancer, comorbidities, and health-related quality of life of older adults. Health Care Financ Rev 29(4):41–56PubMedPubMedCentral

28.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health (2006) Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4:79CrossRef

29.

Kotronoulas G, Kearney N, Maguire R et al (2014) What is the value of the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures toward improvement of patient outcomes, processes of care, and health service outcomes in cancer care?A systematic review of controlled trials. J Clin Oncol 32(14):1480–1501CrossRefPubMed

30.

Gordon BE, Chen RC (2017) Patient-reported outcomes in cancer survivorship. Acta Oncol 56(2):166–173CrossRefPubMed

31.

Mokkink LB, de Vet HC, Prinsen CA et al (2018) COSMIN risk of bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res 27(5):1171–1179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4CrossRefPubMed

32.

Wei Y, McGrath P, Hayden J et al (2018) The quality of mental health literacy measurement tools evaluating the stigma of mental illness: a systematic review. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 27(5):433–462. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796017000178CrossRefPubMed

33.

Yang X, Zhang Y, Han S et al (2023) Patient-reported outcome measures of stigma and discrimination for people living with HIV: a systematic review protocol. JBI Evid Synth 21(9):1838–1846. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-22-00314CrossRefPubMed

34.

Prinsen CAC, Mokkink LB, Bouter LM et al (2018) COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res 27(5):1147–1157CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 134:178–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.001CrossRefPubMed

36.

Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL et al (2012) Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res 21(4):651–657CrossRefPubMed

37.

Terwee CB, Prinsen CAC, Chiarotto A et al (2018) COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study. Qual Life Res 27(5):1159–1170CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR et al (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60(1):34–42CrossRefPubMed

39.

Alhazzani W, Guyatt G (2018) An overview of the GRADE approach and a peek at the future. Med J Aust 209(7):291–292CrossRefPubMed

40.

Bu X, Li S, Cheng ASK et al (2022) Breast cancer stigma scale: a reliable and valid stigma measure for patients with breast cancer. Front Psychol 10(13):841280CrossRef

41.

Daryaafzoon M, Amini-Tehrani M, Zohrevandi Z et al (2020) Translation and factor analysis of the stigma scale for chronic illnesses 8-item version among iranian women with breast cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 21(2):449–455CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Dewan MF, Hassouneh D, Song M et al (2020) Development of the breast cancer stigma scale for Arab patients. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs 7(3):295–300CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Paltun B, Bölükbaş N (2021) Turkish version of the cancer stigma scale: validity and reliability study. Psychol Health Med 26(sup1):37–48CrossRefPubMed

44.

Li RX, Jiang ZL, Gong SM et al (2019) Credit validity study of the Chinese stigma experience questionnaire in breast cancer patients. Chin J Pract Nurs Care 28:2195–2199

45.

Feng LS, Li XY, Wang HR et al (2018) Development and validation of the cancer self-perceived discrimination scale for Chinese cancer patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes 16(1):165CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

Yılmaz M, Dişsiz G, Demir F et al (2017) Reliability and validity study of a tool to measure cancer stigma: patient version. Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs 4(2):155–161CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

So HS, Chae MJ, Kim HY (2017) Reliability and validity of the Korean version of the cancer stigma scale. J Korean Acad Nurs 47(1):121–132CrossRefPubMed

48.

Tsuchiya M, Horn S, Ingham R (2012) Development of the Psycho-social Discomfort Scale (PsDS): investigation of psychometric properties among Japanese breast cancer survivors. Psychooncology 21(2):161–167CrossRefPubMed

49.

Peng J, Shen LJ, Chen WT et al (2020) Interpretation of measurement tool stability, measurement error and study risk of bias in the COSMIN-RoB list. Chin J Evid Based Med 20(11):1340–1344

50.

Shi YX, Zhang HM, Huang YQ et al (2021) Interpretation of the consensus criteria (COSMIN) bias risk assessment list for selecting health measurement tools. Nurs Manage China 21(07):1053–1057

51.

Gao Y, Zhao JF, Xu LL et al (2020) The evaluation of the COSMIN operating guide on the Chinese version of the electronic health literacy scale. Chin J Gerontol 40(09):1968–1973

Titel: Assessment tools for stigma in breast cancer patients based on COSMIN guidelines: a systematic review
verfasst von: Xue‐Mei Xie
Jing Gao
Ding‐Xi Bai
Huan Chen
Yue Li
Publikationsdatum: 01.01.2024
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 1/2024
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-08276-3

Update Onkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Assessment tools for stigma in breast cancer patients based on COSMIN guidelines: a systematic review

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Bei seelischem Stress sind Checkpoint-Hemmer weniger wirksam

Antikörper mobilisiert Neutrophile gegen Krebs

Erhebliches Risiko für Kehlkopfkrebs bei mäßiger Dysplasie

15% bedauern gewählte Blasenkrebs-Therapie

Update Onkologie

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2024

2023 updated MASCC/ESMO consensus recommendations: prevention of nausea and vomiting following high-emetic-risk antineoplastic agents

High-protein home parenteral nutrition in malnourished oncology patients: a systematic literature review

Representation of race and ethnicity among cancer survivors in trials of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I): A systematic review

Palonosetron for prevention of delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis

Association of self-directed walking with toxicity moderation during chemotherapy for the treatment of early breast cancer

Knowledge, attitudes, practices and associated factors regarding high output stoma of ileostomy among colorectal surgical nurses: a multicentre cross-sectional study

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Bei seelischem Stress sind Checkpoint-Hemmer weniger wirksam

Antikörper mobilisiert Neutrophile gegen Krebs

Erhebliches Risiko für Kehlkopfkrebs bei mäßiger Dysplasie

15% bedauern gewählte Blasenkrebs-Therapie

Update Onkologie