| Title |
A systematic review of the measurement properties of the Body Image Scale (BIS) in cancer patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-018-4145-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heleen C. Melissant, Koen I. Neijenhuijs, Femke Jansen, Neil K. Aaronson, Mogens Groenvold, Bernhard Holzner, Caroline B. Terwee, Cornelia F. van Uden-Kraan, Pim Cuijpers, Irma M. Verdonck-de Leeuw |
| Abstract |
Body image is acknowledged as an important aspect of health-related quality of life in cancer patients. The Body Image Scale (BIS) is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) to evaluate body image in cancer patients. The aim of this study was to systematically review measurement properties of the BIS among cancer patients. A search in Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science was performed to identify studies that investigated measurement properties of the BIS (Prospero ID 42017057237). Study quality was assessed (excellent, good, fair, poor), and data were extracted and analyzed according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology on structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, hypothesis testing for construct validity, and responsiveness. Evidence was categorized into sufficient, insufficient, inconsistent, or indeterminate. Nine studies were included. Evidence was sufficient for structural validity (one factor solution), internal consistency (α = 0.86-0.96), and reliability (r > 0.70); indeterminate for measurement error (information on minimal important change lacked) and responsiveness (increasing body image disturbance in only one study); and inconsistent for hypothesis testing (conflicting results). Quality of the evidence was moderate to low. No studies reported on cross-cultural validity. The BIS is a PROM with good structural validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability, but good quality studies on the other measurement properties are needed to optimize evidence. It is recommended to include a wider variety of cancer diagnoses and treatment modalities in these future studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 101 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 10% |
| Librarian | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 17% |
| Unknown | 34 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 18% |
| Psychology | 18 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 40 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2019.
All research outputs
#15,688,569
of 23,313,051 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#3,168
of 4,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,592
of 333,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#77
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,313,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,689 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.