A biopsychosocial model of resilience for breast cancer: A preliminary study in mainland China

Ye, Zeng Jie; Peng, Chao; Zhang, Hao Wei; Liang, Mu Zi; Zhao, Jing; Sun, Zhe; Hu, Guang Yun; Yu, Yuan Liang

doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2018.08.001

Cited by 52 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, no resilience scales have been formulated to be specific to patients with cancer, and the application of generic resilience instruments among cancer-specific populations has been criticized [5]. To address this issue, we developed a 25-item Resilience Scale Specific to Cancer (RS-SC-25) as an aid for nurses, physicians and social workers to assess the resilience levels of patients [6]; RS-SC-25 was then validated based on classic theory test, item response theory, and resilience-related empirical research [7,8]. The RS-SC-25 has Chinese and English versions and consists of five domains (generic element, benefit finding, support and coping, hope for the future, and meaning for existence); higher scores indicate higher resilience levels [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis

Zhang

Tang

et al. 2020

Health Qual Life Outcomes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The minimum clinical important differences (MCIDs) of resilience instruments in patients with cancer have not been comprehensively described. This study was designed to evaluate MCIDs of 10-item and 25-item resilience scales specific to cancer (RS-SC-10 and RS-SC-25). Methods From June 2015 to December 2018, RS-SCs were longitudinally measured in 765 patients with different cancer diagnoses at baseline (T0) and 3 months later (T1). The EORTC QLQ-C30, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Allostatic Load Index were measured concurrently as anchors. Anchor-based methods (linear regression, within-group), distribution-based methods(within-group), and receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs, within-subject) were performed to evaluate the MCIDs. Results 623 of 765 (84.1%) patients had paired RS-SCs scores. Moderate correlations were identified between the change in RS-SCs and change in anchors (r = 0.38–0.44, all p < 0.001). Linear regression estimated + 8.9 and − 6.7 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and + 3.4 and − 2.5 for RS-SC-10. Distribution-based methods estimated + 9.9 and − 9.9 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and + 4.0 and − 4.0 for RS-SC-10. ROC estimated + 5.5 and − 4.5 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and + 2.0 and − 1.5 for RS-SC-10. Conclusions The most reliable MCID is around 5 points for RS-SC-25 and 2 points for RS-SC-10. RS-SCs are more responsive to the worsening status of resilience in patients with cancer and these estimates could be useful in future resilience-based intervention trials.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis

Zhang

Tang

et al. 2020

Health Qual Life Outcomes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, the current study was designed to calculate the MCIDs of RS-SCs using distribution-and anchor-based methods. Based on previous ndings [4,[6][7][8][13][14], resilience was strongly associated with anxiety, depression, quality of life, and Allostatic Load Index. Thus, we postulated the following:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…However, no resilience scales have been formulated to be speci c to patients with cancer, and the application of generic resilience instruments among cancer-speci c populations has been criticized [5]. To address this issue, we developed a 25-item Resilience Scale Speci c to Cancer (RS-SC-25) as an aid for nurses, physicians and social workers to assess the resilience levels of patients [6]; RS-SC-25 was then validated based on classic theory test, item response theory, and resiliencerelated empirical research [7][8]. The RS-SC-25 has Chinese and English versions and consists of ve domains (generic element, bene t nding, support and coping, hope for the future, and meaning for existence); higher scores indicate higher resilience levels [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimum Clinical Important Difference for Resilience Scale Specific to Cancer: A Prospective Analysis

Zhang

Tang

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract Background: The minimum clinical important differences (MCIDs) of resilience instruments in patients with cancer have not been comprehensively described. This study was designed to evaluate MCIDs of 10-item and 25-item resilience scales specific to cancer (RS-SC-10 and RS-SC-25).Methods: From June 2015 to December 2018, RS-SCs were longitudinally measured in 765 patients with different cancer diagnoses at baseline (T0) and 3 months later (T1). The EORTC QLQ-C30, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Allostatic Load Index were measured concurrently as anchors. Anchor-based methods (linear regression, within-group), distribution-based methods(within-group), and receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs, within-subject) were performed to evaluate the MCIDs.Results: 623 of 765 (84.1%) patients had paired RS-SCs scores. Moderate correlations were identified between the change in RS-SCs and change in anchors (r= 0.38-0.44, all p<0.001). Linear regression estimated +8.9 and -6.7 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and +3.4 and -2.5 for RS-SC-10. Distribution-based methods estimated +9.9 and -9.9 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and +4.0 and -4.0 for RS-SC-10. ROC estimated +5.5 and -4.5 as the MCIDs of RS-SC-25, and +2.0 and -1.5 for RS-SC-10.Conclusions: The most reliable MCID is around 5 points for RS-SC-25 and 2 points for RS-SC-10. RS-SCs are more responsive to the worsening status of resilience in patients with cancer and these estimates could be useful in future resilience-based intervention trials.

show abstract

“…Besides that the feeling that arises such as distrust of what happened and feeling angry about what happened to him is a bad thing for his life (Castillo, Mendiola and Tiemensma, 2019). However, although breast cancer causes psychological problems, the hope of healing triggers an effort to be made (Baniasadi, kashani and Jamshidifar, 2014;Ye et al, 2018;You et al, 2018) (Hernández et al, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coping Mechanism in Women with Breast Cancer

Apriliyanti

Kusnanto

Suwito³

et al. 2019

JNK

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Impaired coping mechanisms often occur in women with breast cancer. The purpose of this study is to determine the description of coping mechanisms in women with breast cancer who undergo chemorepy, radiation or both.Methods: The population in this study were women with breast cancer who underwent chemotherapy, radiation or both. Sampling was done by random sampling where the number of samples is 70. Taking data using the COPE Brief instrument.Result: Four indicators in the destructive category were acceptance (54.3%), denial (61.4%), emotional support (52.9%) and positive reframing (67.1%) while three indicators were mostly in the constructive category, namely self blame (60%), active (64.3) %), and Behavioral disengagement (72.9%).Conclusion: Four destructive indicators indicate poor avoidance and positive thinking in breast cancer patients, while 3 constructive indicators describe good problem solving. Assessment based on this indicator can be taken into consideration in the selection of appropriate interventions to improve coping mechanisms in breast cancer patients.

show abstract

A biopsychosocial model of resilience for breast cancer: A preliminary study in mainland China

Cited by 52 publications

References 37 publications

Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis

Minimum clinical important difference for resilience scale specific to cancer: a prospective analysis

Minimum Clinical Important Difference for Resilience Scale Specific to Cancer: A Prospective Analysis

Coping Mechanism in Women with Breast Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About