{"title":"乳腺癌团队中多学科医疗保健提供者肿瘤生育障碍评估工具的开发和有效性测试","authors":"Sheng-Miauh Huang, Jerry Cheng-Yen Lai, Chin-Ching Li, Ping-Ho Chen, Pei-Ju Lien, Ching-Ting Lien","doi":"10.1097/jnr.0000000000000479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Multidisciplinary healthcare providers, especially clinical nurses, lack a valid tool to assess the comprehensive barriers affecting oncofertility care in breast cancer treatment.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aims of the research were to develop a self-assessment scale on oncofertility barriers and test its validity and reliability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a methodological study. The initial 36 items of the developed Oncofertility Barrier Scale (OBS) were generated through qualitative study and a review of the literature. This scale was further refined using expert validity (n = 10), face validity (n = 10), and item analysis (n = 184). Exploratory factor analysis with principal axis factoring and direct oblimin rotation was used to determine the construct validity. The reliability of the OBS was evaluated using internal consistency and test-retest analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean item-level and scale-level content validity indices of the initial OBS were higher than .96. The data were shown to be feasible for the factor analysis, and a six-factor solution was chosen that accounted for approximately 57.6% of the total variance. These factors included (a) lack of information and education, (b) rigid thinking toward oncofertility care, (c) cancer patient stereotypes, (d) fertility risk, (e) insufficient support, and (f) interrupted oncofertility care. The Cronbach's alpha of the 27-item OBS was .91, and the test-retest reliability coefficient was .55.</p><p><strong>Conclusions/implications for practice: </strong>The final version of the developed OBS has acceptable reliability, content validity, and construct validity. This scale is appropriate for use in research and clinical practice settings to identify the barriers to fertility cancer care that should be resolved by the breast cancer care team.</p>","PeriodicalId":49158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nursing Research","volume":"30 2","pages":"e195"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and Validity Testing of an Assessment Tool for Oncofertility Barriers in Multidisciplinary Healthcare Providers on the Breast Cancer Team.\",\"authors\":\"Sheng-Miauh Huang, Jerry Cheng-Yen Lai, Chin-Ching Li, Ping-Ho Chen, Pei-Ju Lien, Ching-Ting Lien\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/jnr.0000000000000479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Multidisciplinary healthcare providers, especially clinical nurses, lack a valid tool to assess the comprehensive barriers affecting oncofertility care in breast cancer treatment.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aims of the research were to develop a self-assessment scale on oncofertility barriers and test its validity and reliability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a methodological study. The initial 36 items of the developed Oncofertility Barrier Scale (OBS) were generated through qualitative study and a review of the literature. This scale was further refined using expert validity (n = 10), face validity (n = 10), and item analysis (n = 184). Exploratory factor analysis with principal axis factoring and direct oblimin rotation was used to determine the construct validity. The reliability of the OBS was evaluated using internal consistency and test-retest analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean item-level and scale-level content validity indices of the initial OBS were higher than .96. The data were shown to be feasible for the factor analysis, and a six-factor solution was chosen that accounted for approximately 57.6% of the total variance. These factors included (a) lack of information and education, (b) rigid thinking toward oncofertility care, (c) cancer patient stereotypes, (d) fertility risk, (e) insufficient support, and (f) interrupted oncofertility care. The Cronbach's alpha of the 27-item OBS was .91, and the test-retest reliability coefficient was .55.</p><p><strong>Conclusions/implications for practice: </strong>The final version of the developed OBS has acceptable reliability, content validity, and construct validity. This scale is appropriate for use in research and clinical practice settings to identify the barriers to fertility cancer care that should be resolved by the breast cancer care team.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49158,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Nursing Research\",\"volume\":\"30 2\",\"pages\":\"e195\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Nursing Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000479\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nursing Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000479","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Development and Validity Testing of an Assessment Tool for Oncofertility Barriers in Multidisciplinary Healthcare Providers on the Breast Cancer Team.
Background: Multidisciplinary healthcare providers, especially clinical nurses, lack a valid tool to assess the comprehensive barriers affecting oncofertility care in breast cancer treatment.
Purpose: The aims of the research were to develop a self-assessment scale on oncofertility barriers and test its validity and reliability.
Methods: This was a methodological study. The initial 36 items of the developed Oncofertility Barrier Scale (OBS) were generated through qualitative study and a review of the literature. This scale was further refined using expert validity (n = 10), face validity (n = 10), and item analysis (n = 184). Exploratory factor analysis with principal axis factoring and direct oblimin rotation was used to determine the construct validity. The reliability of the OBS was evaluated using internal consistency and test-retest analyses.
Results: The mean item-level and scale-level content validity indices of the initial OBS were higher than .96. The data were shown to be feasible for the factor analysis, and a six-factor solution was chosen that accounted for approximately 57.6% of the total variance. These factors included (a) lack of information and education, (b) rigid thinking toward oncofertility care, (c) cancer patient stereotypes, (d) fertility risk, (e) insufficient support, and (f) interrupted oncofertility care. The Cronbach's alpha of the 27-item OBS was .91, and the test-retest reliability coefficient was .55.
Conclusions/implications for practice: The final version of the developed OBS has acceptable reliability, content validity, and construct validity. This scale is appropriate for use in research and clinical practice settings to identify the barriers to fertility cancer care that should be resolved by the breast cancer care team.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Nursing Research (JNR) is comprised of original articles that come from a variety of national and international institutions and reflect trends and issues of contemporary nursing practice in Taiwan. All articles are published in English so that JNR can better serve the whole nursing profession and introduce nursing in Taiwan to people around the world. Topics cover not only the field of nursing but also related fields such as psychology, education, management and statistics.