{"title":"Development and Psychometric Validation of a Comprehensive Questionnaire to Assess Oncologists' Knowledge of Chemotherapy-Drug Interaction.","authors":"Bassam Abdul Rasool Hassan","doi":"10.1007/s13187-025-02569-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Chemotherapy-drug interactions (CDIs) pose significant challenges in oncology, affecting treatment efficacy and patient safety. Despite their importance, there is a lack of validated tools to assess oncologists' knowledge of CDIs. This study aimed to develop and validate a comprehensive questionnaire to address this gap and ensure the reliability and validity of the instrument. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 135 oncologists from various clinical roles in Iraq. The questionnaire included 46 general knowledge and 26 specific knowledge items, developed based on literature and expert consultation. Psychometric validation involved exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess structural validity. Reliability was evaluated through Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability (CR), and test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Item Response Theory (IRT) analysis was applied to evaluate item-level performance. The EFA and CFA identified six distinct domains in the general knowledge section, with strong factor loadings for most items. Items addressing definitions, classifications, and risk factors demonstrated high loadings (e.g., \"Severe chemotherapy-drug interactions often necessitate aggressive monitoring,\" EFA: 0.73, CFA: 0.78). Specific knowledge items also exhibited robust psychometric properties, with high discrimination indices (a > 1.5) and low guessing parameters. Reliability analysis indicated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > 0.8) and stability over time (ICC > 0.75). The questionnaire effectively differentiated respondents based on their knowledge levels and demonstrated good model fit (CFI: 0.93, RMSEA: 0.06). This study developed and validated a reliable and robust questionnaire to assess oncologists' knowledge of CDIs. The tool provides a standardized method for evaluating CDI knowledge, addressing a critical gap in oncology practice. Future research should focus on applying this questionnaire in diverse contexts and updating it to reflect advancements in clinical guidelines and drug interaction knowledge.</p>","PeriodicalId":50246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-025-02569-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Chemotherapy-drug interactions (CDIs) pose significant challenges in oncology, affecting treatment efficacy and patient safety. Despite their importance, there is a lack of validated tools to assess oncologists' knowledge of CDIs. This study aimed to develop and validate a comprehensive questionnaire to address this gap and ensure the reliability and validity of the instrument. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 135 oncologists from various clinical roles in Iraq. The questionnaire included 46 general knowledge and 26 specific knowledge items, developed based on literature and expert consultation. Psychometric validation involved exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess structural validity. Reliability was evaluated through Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability (CR), and test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Item Response Theory (IRT) analysis was applied to evaluate item-level performance. The EFA and CFA identified six distinct domains in the general knowledge section, with strong factor loadings for most items. Items addressing definitions, classifications, and risk factors demonstrated high loadings (e.g., "Severe chemotherapy-drug interactions often necessitate aggressive monitoring," EFA: 0.73, CFA: 0.78). Specific knowledge items also exhibited robust psychometric properties, with high discrimination indices (a > 1.5) and low guessing parameters. Reliability analysis indicated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > 0.8) and stability over time (ICC > 0.75). The questionnaire effectively differentiated respondents based on their knowledge levels and demonstrated good model fit (CFI: 0.93, RMSEA: 0.06). This study developed and validated a reliable and robust questionnaire to assess oncologists' knowledge of CDIs. The tool provides a standardized method for evaluating CDI knowledge, addressing a critical gap in oncology practice. Future research should focus on applying this questionnaire in diverse contexts and updating it to reflect advancements in clinical guidelines and drug interaction knowledge.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Cancer Education, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) and the European Association for Cancer Education (EACE), is an international, quarterly journal dedicated to the publication of original contributions dealing with the varied aspects of cancer education for physicians, dentists, nurses, students, social workers and other allied health professionals, patients, the general public, and anyone interested in effective education about cancer related issues.
Articles featured include reports of original results of educational research, as well as discussions of current problems and techniques in cancer education. Manuscripts are welcome on such subjects as educational methods, instruments, and program evaluation. Suitable topics include teaching of basic science aspects of cancer; the assessment of attitudes toward cancer patient management; the teaching of diagnostic skills relevant to cancer; the evaluation of undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education programs; and articles about all aspects of cancer education from prevention to palliative care.
We encourage contributions to a special column called Reflections; these articles should relate to the human aspects of dealing with cancer, cancer patients, and their families and finding meaning and support in these efforts.
Letters to the Editor (600 words or less) dealing with published articles or matters of current interest are also invited.
Also featured are commentary; book and media reviews; and announcements of educational programs, fellowships, and grants.
Articles should be limited to no more than ten double-spaced typed pages, and there should be no more than three tables or figures and 25 references. We also encourage brief reports of five typewritten pages or less, with no more than one figure or table and 15 references.