18 Years and Over, Cancer, With Caregiver Support Time
Conditions
Keywords
psychology, caregiver support time
Brief summary
Validation of the PO-BADO in its short and long versions that need a standardized validation process with the inclusion of 450 Patients
Detailed description
In the case of confirmation of the PO- Bado long version, that means for 240 patients a caregiver support time longest 15 minutes than usually suggested, since in 6 items of the Po- Bado usually explored in the caregiver support time, add 6 other additional items provided in the long version. This further time, can be considered as an additional contribution to the free expression. For the 120 patients seen during the validation of the short version , there is no change in the duration of the caregiver support time.
Interventions
None listed
Sponsors
Fondation de France
Ligue contre le cancer, France
Institut Bergonié
Study design
Observational model
OTHER
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* cancer * having a caregiver support time * Aged 18 years and over
Exclusion criteria
* without known psychiatric history
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Reliability of the Questionnaire in Terms of Internal Consistency | 2 weeks after diagnosis | Internal consistency assessed using the Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Cronbach's alpha coefficient is the correlation between responses to a questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha can take values between 0 and 1. The internal consistency of a test is greater when the correlation between items is high on average. |
| Reliability of the Questionnaire in Terms of Interrater Reliability | 2 weeks after diagnosis | Questionnaires were were recorded and interpreted by nurses. Inter-rater reliability assessed for each item and for the entire scale, based on the selection of four nurses who will independently rate the recorded content of interviews. The conclusions will be based on intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). |
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Cancer Patients Patientswere recruited from a Comprehensive Regional Cancer Centre in France | 252 |
| Total | 252 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Cancer Patients | — |
|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 57 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.8 | — |
| Race and Ethnicity Not Collected | — | — Participants |
| Region of Enrollment France | 252 participants | — |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 192 Participants | — |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 60 Participants | — |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk |
|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 0 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 0 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 0 |
Outcome results
Primary
Reliability of the Questionnaire in Terms of Internal Consistency
Internal consistency assessed using the Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Cronbach's alpha coefficient is the correlation between responses to a questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha can take values between 0 and 1. The internal consistency of a test is greater when the correlation between items is high on average.
Time frame: 2 weeks after diagnosis
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Cancer Patients | Reliability of the Questionnaire in Terms of Internal Consistency | 0.87 alpha coefficient |
Primary
Reliability of the Questionnaire in Terms of Interrater Reliability
Questionnaires were were recorded and interpreted by nurses. Inter-rater reliability assessed for each item and for the entire scale, based on the selection of four nurses who will independently rate the recorded content of interviews. The conclusions will be based on intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).
Time frame: 2 weeks after diagnosis
Population: To estimate the interrater reliability (IRR), interviews of 40 patients were recorded and interpreted by four nurses.~IRR was assessed using a two-way random, consistency, average-measures intraclass correlation coefficient to assess the degree that coders were consistent in their ratings for each patient.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Cancer Patients | Reliability of the Questionnaire in Terms of Interrater Reliability | 0.71 correlation coefficient (range -1 to 1) |