癌症患者失眠症元认知问卷简表的验证及其在失眠症的差异-认知唤醒模型中的可行性。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Psychiatry Investigation Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-24 DOI:10.30773/pi.2023.0435
Jana Sleiman, Oli Ahmed, Seockhoon Chung
{"title":"癌症患者失眠症元认知问卷简表的验证及其在失眠症的差异-认知唤醒模型中的可行性。","authors":"Jana Sleiman, Oli Ahmed, Seockhoon Chung","doi":"10.30773/pi.2023.0435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to explore the reliability and validity of the two shortened versions of the Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia (Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia-6 items [MCQI-6], Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia-14 items [MCQI-14]) among patients with cancer and examine the feasibility of the Discrepancy-Cognitive Arousal (DCA) model of insomnia among the cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 154 patients with cancer were enrolled in this survey, which included rating scales such as the discrepancy between desired time in bed and desired total sleep time (DBST) index, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Cancer-related Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitude about Sleep-14 items (C-DBAS-14), MCQI-6, and MCQI-14.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both the MCQI-6 and MCQI-14 showed a good reliability of internal consistency. Confirmatory factor analysis showed a good model fit for two single-factor shortened versions. The total score of the MCQI-6 was significantly correlated with the MCQI-14 (r=0.97, p<0.01), ISI (r=0.68, p<0.01), C-DBAS-14 (r=0.78, p<0.01), and DBST index (r=0.21, p<0.05). Mediation analysis showed that the DBST index did not directly influence insomnia severity; however, the relationship was mediated by cancer-related dysfunctional beliefs about sleep and sleep-related metacognitive process among patients with cancer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Korean versions of MCQI-6 and MCQI-14 are useful, reliable, and valid tools to evaluate sleep-related metacognitive processes among patients with cancer. The DCA model of insomnia was feasible even among cancer patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":21164,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry Investigation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11222085/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of Shortened Forms of Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia and Its Feasibility in the Discrepancy-Cognitive Arousal Model of Insomnia Among Patients With Cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Jana Sleiman, Oli Ahmed, Seockhoon Chung\",\"doi\":\"10.30773/pi.2023.0435\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to explore the reliability and validity of the two shortened versions of the Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia (Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia-6 items [MCQI-6], Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia-14 items [MCQI-14]) among patients with cancer and examine the feasibility of the Discrepancy-Cognitive Arousal (DCA) model of insomnia among the cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 154 patients with cancer were enrolled in this survey, which included rating scales such as the discrepancy between desired time in bed and desired total sleep time (DBST) index, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Cancer-related Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitude about Sleep-14 items (C-DBAS-14), MCQI-6, and MCQI-14.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both the MCQI-6 and MCQI-14 showed a good reliability of internal consistency. Confirmatory factor analysis showed a good model fit for two single-factor shortened versions. The total score of the MCQI-6 was significantly correlated with the MCQI-14 (r=0.97, p<0.01), ISI (r=0.68, p<0.01), C-DBAS-14 (r=0.78, p<0.01), and DBST index (r=0.21, p<0.05). Mediation analysis showed that the DBST index did not directly influence insomnia severity; however, the relationship was mediated by cancer-related dysfunctional beliefs about sleep and sleep-related metacognitive process among patients with cancer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Korean versions of MCQI-6 and MCQI-14 are useful, reliable, and valid tools to evaluate sleep-related metacognitive processes among patients with cancer. The DCA model of insomnia was feasible even among cancer patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21164,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychiatry Investigation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11222085/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychiatry Investigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2023.0435\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2023.0435","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的我们旨在探讨两种缩短版的元认知问卷-失眠症(元认知问卷-失眠症-6项[MCQI-6]、元认知问卷-失眠症-14项[MCQI-14])在癌症患者中的信度和效度,并研究失眠症的差异-认知唤醒(DCA)模型在癌症患者中的可行性:共有154名癌症患者参与了此次调查,调查内容包括期望卧床时间与期望总睡眠时间之间的差异指数(DBST)、失眠严重程度指数(ISI)、癌症相关功能障碍信念和睡眠态度-14条目(C-DBAS-14)、MCQI-6和MCQI-14等评分量表:MCQI-6和MCQI-14均显示出良好的内部一致性可靠性。确认性因素分析表明,两个单因素简化版本的模型拟合良好。MCQI-6的总分与MCQI-14呈显著相关(r=0.97,p):韩国版 MCQI-6 和 MCQI-14 是评估癌症患者睡眠相关元认知过程的有用、可靠和有效的工具。即使在癌症患者中,DCA失眠模型也是可行的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validation of Shortened Forms of Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia and Its Feasibility in the Discrepancy-Cognitive Arousal Model of Insomnia Among Patients With Cancer.

Objective: We aimed to explore the reliability and validity of the two shortened versions of the Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia (Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia-6 items [MCQI-6], Metacognition Questionnaire-Insomnia-14 items [MCQI-14]) among patients with cancer and examine the feasibility of the Discrepancy-Cognitive Arousal (DCA) model of insomnia among the cancer patients.

Methods: A total of 154 patients with cancer were enrolled in this survey, which included rating scales such as the discrepancy between desired time in bed and desired total sleep time (DBST) index, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Cancer-related Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitude about Sleep-14 items (C-DBAS-14), MCQI-6, and MCQI-14.

Results: Both the MCQI-6 and MCQI-14 showed a good reliability of internal consistency. Confirmatory factor analysis showed a good model fit for two single-factor shortened versions. The total score of the MCQI-6 was significantly correlated with the MCQI-14 (r=0.97, p<0.01), ISI (r=0.68, p<0.01), C-DBAS-14 (r=0.78, p<0.01), and DBST index (r=0.21, p<0.05). Mediation analysis showed that the DBST index did not directly influence insomnia severity; however, the relationship was mediated by cancer-related dysfunctional beliefs about sleep and sleep-related metacognitive process among patients with cancer.

Conclusion: The Korean versions of MCQI-6 and MCQI-14 are useful, reliable, and valid tools to evaluate sleep-related metacognitive processes among patients with cancer. The DCA model of insomnia was feasible even among cancer patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
105
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Psychiatry Investigation is published on the 25th day of every month in English by the Korean Neuropsychiatric Association (KNPA). The Journal covers the whole range of psychiatry and neuroscience. Both basic and clinical contributions are encouraged from all disciplines and research areas relevant to the pathophysiology and management of neuropsychiatric disorders and symptoms, as well as researches related to cross cultural psychiatry and ethnic issues in psychiatry. The Journal publishes editorials, review articles, original articles, brief reports, viewpoints and correspondences. All research articles are peer reviewed. Contributions are accepted for publication on the condition that their substance has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere. Authors submitting papers to the Journal (serially or otherwise) with a common theme or using data derived from the same sample (or a subset thereof) must send details of all relevant previous publications and simultaneous submissions. The Journal is not responsible for statements made by contributors. Material in the Journal does not necessarily reflect the views of the Editor or of the KNPA. Manuscripts accepted for publication are copy-edited to improve readability and to ensure conformity with house style.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信