Reliability and validity of a Japanese version of the psychosocial assessment tool for families of children with cancer
Abstract
Background Patients with childhood cancer and their families frequently experience psychosocial distress associated with cancer and its treatment. We thus examined the reliability and validity of a Japanese version of the Psychosocial Assessment Tool, which was designed to screen for psychosocial risk factors among families of children with cancer. Methods Forward-backward translation was used to develop the Japanese version of the Psychosocial Assessment Tool. We conducted a cross-sectional study. Mothers (N = 117), who were the primary caregivers of children with cancer, completed the Japanese version of the Psychosocial Assessment Tool and other measures to establish validity. The internal consistency and 2-week test-retest reliability of the Japanese version of the Psychosocial Assessment Tool were also examined. Results The internal consistency of the Japanese version of the Psychosocial Assessment Tool total score was sufficient (Kuder-Richardson 20 coefficient = 0.84); however, the subscales 'structure and resources,' 'stress reactions' and 'family beliefs' were less than optimal (Kuder-Richardson 20 coefficients = 0.03, 0.49 and 0.49, respectively). The test-retest reliability for the Japanese version of the Psychosocial Assessment Tool total score was sufficient (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.92). Significant correlations with the criteria measures indicated the validity of the Japanese version of the Psychosocial Assessment Tool total score. The optimal cut…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Childhood cancer patients and their families frequently experience psychosocial distress associated with cancer and its treatment.
“childhood cancer patients and their families frequently experience psychosocial distress associated with cancer and its treatment [14]”
From Psychosocial Factors Predicting Resilience in Family Caregivers of Children with Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study (2021) · cites this paper as [14]
Cites
The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure
Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. W. (2001) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x · Cited by 44,910 · see citing works
ASUKAI, N., KATO, H., KAWAMURA, N., KIM, Y., YAMAMOTO, K., KISHIMOTO, J., MIYAKE, Y., & NISHIZONO-MAHER, A. (2002) · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/00005053-200203000-00006 · Cited by 679 · see citing works
Hidden morbidity in cancer: spouse caregivers
Braun, M., Mikulincer, M., Rydall, A., Walsh, A., & Rodin, G. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.10.0909 · Cited by 526 · see citing works
Muramatsu, K., Kamijima, K., Yoshida, M., Otsubo, T., Miyaoka, H., Muramatsu, Y., & Gejyo, F. (2007) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.101.3.952-960 · Cited by 433 · see citing works
Kazak, A. E., Alderfer, M. A., Streisand, R., Simms, S., Rourke, M. T., Barakat, L. P., Gallagher, P., & Cnaan, A. (2004) · Journal of Family Psychology · doi:10.1037/0893-3200.18.3.493 · Cited by 303 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Toledano-Toledano, F., Luna, D., Moral de la Rubia, J., Martínez Valverde, S., Bermúdez Morón, C. A., Salazar García, M., & Vasquez Pauca, M. J. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18020748 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
“The effects and consequences experienced by families caring for children with cancer include the risk of developing anxiety, depression and parental stress [8–10]; caregivers of such children experience a host of stressful events, the most common of which are poor health [11], caregiver burden and burnout [12,13]; chi…”
Background
- Authors
- Tsumura, A., Okuyama, T., Ito, Y., Kondo, M., Saitoh, S., Kamei, M., Sato, I., Ishida, Y., Kato, Y., Takeda, Y., & Akechi, T.
- Affiliations
- Nagoya City University (JP)
- Nagoya City University Hospital (JP)
- The University of Tokyo (JP)
- Shizuoka Cancer Center (JP)
- Shizuoka Children's Hospital (JP)
- Osaka City General Hospital (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Akechi, Tatsuo
- Venue
- Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2019-12-13
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 296-302
- ISSN
- 0368-2811 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-3621
- OpenAlex
- W3008837617
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 0.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
- Young Scientists
- Relay for Life Japan Cancer Society
- Children's Cancer Association of Japan
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Family Support in Illness
- Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
- Keywords
- Psychosocial Assessment Tool, childhood cancer, family caregivers, mothers, psychosocial distress, psychosocial risk screening, Japanese translation, cross-cultural adaptation, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, screening cut-off values, family stress
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Child, Child, Preschool, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Japan, Male, Middle Aged, Mothers, Neoplasms, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Translations, Reproducibility of Results, Caregivers, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
