New resilience instrument for patients with cancer

Ye, Zeng Jie; Liang, Mu Zi; Li, Peng Fei; Sun, Zhe; Chen, Peng; Hu, Guang Yun; Yu, Yuan Liang; Wang, Shu Ni; Qiu, Hong Zhong

doi:10.1007/s11136-017-1736-9

Cited by 51 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both resource scales used in this study, the GSES and the BRCS, are not specific for patients suffering from a certain disease. Disease‐specific scales such as the Resilience Scale RS‐SC (Ye et al, ) or the revised Cancer Behavior Inventory measuring self‐efficacy in cancer patients (Merluzzi et al, ) could perhaps be more precise in the prognosis of disease‐specific QoL outcomes. However, comparisons with the general population are not possible with these scales, and comparisons with other patient groups beyond cancer are also problematic which strongly limits the generalisability of the findings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of self-efficacy and resilient coping on cancer patients’ quality of life

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to analyse whether general self‐efficacy and resilient coping are negatively impacted when people are sick with cancer (compared with people from the general population), and whether these resource variables predict quality of life outcomes in that patient group. A sample of 959 patients recruited in an oncologic rehabilitation clinic was examined once while hospitalised and once again six months thereafter. The outcome variables were quality of life (EORTC QLQ‐C30) and distress (PHQ‐4). The resource variables were self‐efficacy (General Self‐Efficacy Scale) and resilient coping (Brief Resilient Coping Scale). Representative samples of the general population served as controls. Self‐efficacy (d = 0.08) and resilient coping (d = 0.28) were only slightly lower in the patients’ sample than in the general population. Both resource variables were associated with quality of life, but self‐efficacy (and not resilient coping) was the only independent predictor of quality of life functioning scales and distress scores when the baseline values of the dependent variables were also taken into account. Strengthening patients’ belief in their own ability to cope with the disease may help them retain and/or regain a higher level of quality of life.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of self-efficacy and resilient coping on cancer patients’ quality of life

et al. 2018

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: 78%

“…The original RS-SC is a 25-item resilience instrument speci c to cancer (RS-SC-25) that has the ve domains of generic element, bene t nding, support and coping, hope for the future, and meaning for existence [6]. A 10-item RS-SC (RS-SC-10) was developed later by MIRT analysis [9].…”

Section: Rs-scmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…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%

“…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]. RS-SC-25 has good psychometric properties and could be used as a means of establishing a symptomatic threshold to guide the initiation of psychosocial or pharmacological intervention.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

Resilience patterns and transitions in the Be Resilient To Breast Cancer trial: an exploratory latent profile transition analysis

Zhang

Tang

et al. 2021

Psycho-Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Be Resilient to Breast Cancer (BRBC), a theoretically‐derived, resilience‐based, culturally‐tailored, supportive‐expressive group therapy (SEGT), has been developed to help promote patients' resilience in breast cancer. Data from patients receiving BRBC intervention was utilized to explore and define characteristics of resilience patterns and their transitions over time. Methods Resilience was used as a primary outcome and 391 patients completed Resilience Scale Specific to Cancer at enrollment (T0), 2 months (T1), 6 months(T2), and 12 months (T3) after intervention. latent profile transition analysis was performed to model the change in resilience and predict positive transitioning probabilities between resilience patterns (from one pattern to another pattern with a higher level) over time. Results One hundred and forty four resilience patterns were identified after BRBC intervention. 33.1%, 50.3%, and 40.5% of patients experienced positive resilience transitions from T0 to T1, T1 to T2, and T2 to T3, respectively. Patients with middle age, unmarried status, higher education level, and less advanced tumor stage were more likely to experience positive resilience transitions. Conclusion Different transitions of resilience patterns are observed after BRBC intervention. Age, marital status, education, and tumor stage may be four factors affecting the efficacy of SEGT intervention in breast cancer.

show abstract

New resilience instrument for patients with cancer

Abstract: The RS-SC is a brief and specific self-report resilience instrument for Chinese patients with cancer and shows sound psychometric properties in this study. The RS-SC has potential applications in both clinical practice and research with strength-based resiliency interventions.

Cited by 51 publications

References 29 publications

The influence of self-efficacy and resilient coping on cancer patients’ quality of life

The influence of self-efficacy and resilient coping on cancer patients’ quality of life

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

Resilience patterns and transitions in the Be Resilient To Breast Cancer trial: an exploratory latent profile transition analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About