Adaptation and validation of the Chinese version of the lung cancer screening health belief scales

Yuan, Lin; Carter‐Harris, Lisa; Yang, Jiani; Lin, Xiu Jing; Huang, Fang

doi:10.1186/s12889-022-13041-y

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study translated and produced a Korean version of the LCSHBS in South Korea and verified the suitability of the LCSHBS-K by testing its validity and reliability in Korean adults at high risk for lung cancer. The LCSHBS has verified validity and reliability in English-speaking countries, where it was originally developed, as well as in China, which shares cultural similarities with South Korea [28]. In addition, the LCSHBS was translated into a Spanish version, and its validity and reliability were verified [29].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Reliability and Validity of the Korean Version of Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scale

Cho

2023

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to verify the validity and reliability of the LCSHBS-K. This was a methodological study. The participants were adults aged between 50 and 74 years old, according to the selection criteria for lung cancer screening presented by the Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guidelines in oncology recommendations. This study included 204 high-risk individuals who had not been diagnosed with lung cancer. The collected data were analyzed using the IBM SPSS Statistics software 26.0 version (IBM, New York, NY, USA). The reliability was analyzed by Cronbach’s α for internal consistency, and the concurrent validity was analyzed by Pearson’s correlation coefficients to identify the correlations with the health belief scale for Korean adults. To test the convergent validity, the average variance extracted (AVE) and composite reliability (CR) were calculated using confirmatory factor analysis. In addition, the model fit for a tool was CMIN (χ2/df), SRMR, RMSEA, GFI, and CFI as a comparative fit index. The discriminant validity was tested based on AVE > r2. The average age of the participants was 55.49 (SD = 5.07), the average smoking history was 29.55 (SD = 8.12) years, and the average number of cigarettes smoked per day was 12.18 (SD = 7.77). The goodness of fit met the criteria with GFI = 0.81 (criteria > 0.9), CMIN = 1.69 (criteria < 2), SRMR = 0.06 (criteria < 0.08), RMSEA = 0.058 (criteria < 0.06), and CFI = 0.91 (criteria > 0.9). The LCSHBS-K showed a statistically significant positive correlation with the HBS (r = 0.32 (p < 0.001)). Cronbach’s α was 0.80 for all the items in the LCSHBS-K. Therefore, the validity and reliability of the LCSHBS-K tool were confirmed. Based on the results of this study, the Korean version of the LCSHBS tool was found to be suitable for screening lung cancer in high-risk groups in Korea.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Reliability and Validity of the Korean Version of Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scale

Cho

2023

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, relevant research on exploring Chinese long-term smokers' health beliefs of lung cancer screening has been reported. As a result, the Chinese version of lung cancer screening health belief scale has been developed to measure Chinese high-risk population's health beliefs of lung cancer screening [21]. However, health beliefs of lung cancer screening among Hong Kong physicians and high-risk smokers have not been explored.…”

Section: Japanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholders’ Voices of Lung Cancer Screening in Hong Kong: Study Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

Lei

2024

Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: This study aims to (1) explore physicians’ perceptions and experiences of lung cancer screening in Hong Kong, (2) evaluate physicians’ readiness of implementing lung cancer screening in Hong Kong, (3) explore high-risk smokers’ health beliefs of lung cancer and screening, (4) identify barriers and facilitators for high-risk Hong Kong smokers to screening for lung cancer, and (5) validate the Chinese Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scale in relation to high-risk smokers in Hong Kong. Methods and analysis: A mixed methods design will be used in this study. Individual qualitative interviews will be conducted with physicians who have experience with high-risk smokers. Physicians’ perceptions and experiences of lung cancer screening, and their readiness to accept lung cancer screening in Hong Kong, will be gathered through the qualitative interviews. A semi-structured interview guide will be used in the qualitative interviews. In addition, a quantitative survey with qualitative questions will be conducted on high-risk smokers to investigate their health beliefs of lung cancer and screening and barriers and facilitators for them to screening lung cancer. A lung cancer screening health belief scale, sociodemographic questionnaire, smoking and lung cancer screening history questionnaire, lung cancer and screening knowledge questionnaire, lung cancer stigma scale, generalized anxiety disorder scale, patient health questionnaire-9, patients’ medical trust scale and preferred lung cancer screening intervention delivery questionnaire will be conducted in the quantitative survey. Constant comparison and content analysis will be used to analyze the qualitative data. Descriptive data analysis, validity and reliability analysis, one-way analysis of variance and post hoc analyses will be used to analyze quantitative data. Discussions: This study explores physicians’ and high-risk smokers’ perceptions and experiences toward lung cancer screening in Hong Kong. Findings from this study can help healthcare providers and policy makers become aware of the stakeholder’s voices. In addition, these findings can help to inform the design of future interventional lung cancer screening programs and provide a tool to measure Chinese high-risk smokers’ health beliefs toward lung cancer screening. A major limitation of this mixed methods study is the amount of time taken to complete the overall study. Also, its complexity requires more collaboration and networking among researchers. Ethics and dissemination: This study has minimal risk to the participants. It will be submitted to the university IRB for ethical approval. Findings related to physicians’ perceptions and experiences of lung cancer screening in Hong Kong, physicians’ readiness of implementing lung cancer screening, high-risk smokers’ health beliefs of lung cancer and screening, barriers, and facilitators for high-risk Hong Kong smokers to screening lung cancer will be disseminated in journals and conferences. The reliability and validity of the Chinese lung cancer screening health belief scale will be reported in methodological research journals.

show abstract

“…According to the definition of the World Health Organization (WHO), passive smoking meant that non-smokers had inhaled the smoke exhaled by smokers for at least 15 minutes more than 1 day in a week. The degree of smoking in current and former smokers was measured by heaviness of smoking index (HSI), 11 which was <400 for mild smoking, and ≥400 for heavy smoking. Alcohol consumption was assessed using the consumption subscale of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT).…”

Section: Questionnaire Design and Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The prevention and treatment of lung cancer is a major challenge in China 3–7 . Therefore, early detection of lung cancer through screening can effectively improve the prognosis of lung cancer and significantly reduce the mortality rate of lung cancer 8–11 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[3][4][5][6][7] Therefore, early detection of lung cancer through screening can effectively improve the prognosis of lung cancer and significantly reduce the mortality rate of lung cancer. [8][9][10][11] The current evidence that low-dose helical computed tomography (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality comes primarily from two randomized controlled trials. 8,[12][13][14] From 2002 to 2004, the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) was carried out by the American Lung Cancer Screening Research Group.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Investigation on the incidence and risk factors of lung cancer among Chinese hospital employees

Chen

Kang

et al. 2022

Thoracic Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective In recent years, the lung cancer incidence has grown and the population is younger. We intend to find out the true detection rate of pulmonary nodules and the incidence of lung cancer in the population and search for the risk factors. Method Hospital employees ≥40 years old who underwent low‐dose computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening from January 2019 to March 2022 were selected to record CT‐imaging characteristics, pathology, staging, and questionnaires to investigate past history, smoking history, diet, mental health, etc. PM2.5 and radiation intake in radiation‐related occupation received monitoring in hospital. Result The detection rate of suspicious pulmonary nodules was 9.1% (233/2552), and the incidence rate of lung cancer (including adenocarcinoma in situ) was 4.0% (103/2552). Morbidity among doctors, nurses, technicians, administers, and logistics was no difference (p = 0.184), but higher in women than in men (4.7% vs 2.4% p = 0.002). The invasiveness increased with age and CT density of nodules (p = 0.018). The relationship between lung cancer morbidity and PM2.5 was not clear (p = 0.543); and no lung cancer has been found in employees related ionizing radiation. Conclusion The high screening rate has brought about a high incidence of lung cancer. At present, the risk factor analysis of lung cancer based on small samples cannot find the direct cause. Most of the ground glass opacity (GGO)s detected by LDCT screening are indolent, but there are also rapidly progressive lung cancer. A predictive model to identify active and indolent GGO is necessary.

show abstract

Adaptation and validation of the Chinese version of the lung cancer screening health belief scales

Cited by 5 publications

References 39 publications

Reliability and Validity of the Korean Version of Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scale

Reliability and Validity of the Korean Version of Lung Cancer Screening Health Belief Scale

Stakeholders’ Voices of Lung Cancer Screening in Hong Kong: Study Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

Investigation on the incidence and risk factors of lung cancer among Chinese hospital employees

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About