↓ Skip to main content

Cross-cultural psychometric assessment of an appetite questionnaire for patients with cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cross-cultural psychometric assessment of an appetite questionnaire for patients with cancer
Published in
Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, May 2018
DOI 10.1590/2237-6089-2017-0093
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Claudia Bernardes Spexoto, Sergio Vicente Serrano, Vanessa Halliday, João Maroco, Andrew Wilcock, Juliana Alvares Duarte Bonini Campos

Abstract

To evaluate the psychometric properties, along with cross-cultural invariance analysis, of the Cancer Appetite and Symptom Questionnaire (CASQ). Data from 555 United Kingdom (UK) cancer patients were used to evaluate the psychometric properties of the CASQ. Construct validity was assessed through factorial and convergent validity. We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis using as indices the chi-square ratio by degrees of freedom (χ2/df), the comparative fit index (CFI), the goodness of fit index (GFI), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Convergent validity was estimated by the items' average variance extracted (AVE). Reliability was estimated by composite reliability and internal consistency. Factorial invariance analysis of the CASQ was evaluated by multigroup analysis (∆χ2) using the UK and Brazilian samples. All items showed adequate psychometric sensitivity in the UK sample. One item was removed and four correlations were included between errors with an appropriate fit of the model (χ2/df = 2.674, CFI = 0.966, GFI = 0.964, RMSEA = 0.055). The reliability of the CASQ was adequate and the convergent validity was low. The factorial structure of the CASQ differed across countries, and a lack of measurement invariance for the two countries was observed (λ: ∆χ2 = 64.008, p < 0.001; i: ∆χ2 = 3515.047, p < 0.001; Res: ∆χ2 = 4452.504, p < 0.001). The CASQ showed adequate psychometric properties in the UK sample. The ability to estimate loss of appetite and the presence of symptoms was different between UK and Brazilian patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 29%
Librarian 2 14%
Researcher 2 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 7%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 21%
Social Sciences 3 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Unknown 7 50%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 June 2018.
All research outputs
#7,378,056
of 13,092,437 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
#20
of 78 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,621
of 271,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,092,437 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 78 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
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 271,175 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them