↓ Skip to main content

Assessing cancer patients’ quality of life and supportive care needs: Translation-revalidation of the CARES in Flemish and exhaustive evaluation of concurrent validity

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Assessing cancer patients’ quality of life and supportive care needs: Translation-revalidation of the CARES in Flemish and exhaustive evaluation of concurrent validity
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1335-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bojoura Schouten, Elke Van Hoof, Patrick Vankrunkelsven, Ward Schrooten, Paul Bulens, Frank Buntinx, Jeroen Mebis, Dominique Vandijck, Irina Cleemput, Johan Hellings

Abstract

The prevalence of cancer increases every year, leading to a growing population of patients and survivors in need for care. To achieve good quality care, a patient-centered approach is essential. Correct and timely detection of needs throughout the different stages of the care trajectory is crucial and can be supported by the use of screening and assessment in a stepped-care approach. The Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System (CARES) is a valuable and comprehensive quality of life and needs assessment instrument. For use in Flemish research and clinical practice, the CARES tool was translated for the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium (Flanders) from its original English format. This protocol paper describes the translation and revalidation of this Flemish CARES version. After forward-backward translation of the CARES into Flemish we aim to recruit 150 adult cancer patients with a primary cancer diagnosis (stage I, II or III) for validation. In this study with a combination of qualitative and a quantitative approach, qualitative data will be collected through focus groups and supplemented by two phases of quantitative data collection: i) an initial patient survey containing questions on socio-demographic and medical data, the CARES and seven concurrent instruments; and ii) a second survey administered after 1 week containing the CARES and supplementary questions to explore their impressions on the content and the feasibility of the CARES. With this extensive data collection process, psychometric validity of the Flemish CARES can be tested thoroughly using classical test theory. Internal consistency of summary scales, test-retest reliability, content validity, construct validity, concurrent validity and feasibility of the instrument will be examined. If the Flemish CARES version is found reliable, valid and feasible, it will be used in future research and clinical practice. Comprehensive assessment with the CARES in a stepped-care approach can facilitate timely identification of cancer patients' psychosocial concerns and care needs so it can contribute to efficient provision of patient-centered quality care. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02282696 (July 16, 2014).

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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 17%
Student > Master 5 12%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Other 9 22%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 24%
Psychology 9 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 20%
Computer Science 2 5%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 7 17%

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 March 2016.
All research outputs
#3,066,211
of 7,401,456 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,376
of 2,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,473
of 275,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#58
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,401,456 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 57th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,785 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 275,610 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.