Skip to content

Resilience Models in Adolescence and Youth With Cancer in Taiwan

Validation of Resilience Models About Cancer in Adolescence and Youth in Taiwan

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06179914
Enrollment
223
Registered
2023-12-22
Start date
2020-11-02
Completion date
2022-09-26
Last updated
2023-12-22

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Childhood Cancer, Coping Behavior, Hope, Resilience

Keywords

Resilience, Hope, social support, Coping, adolescent and young adult, uncertainty

Brief summary

Validation of Resilience Models about Cancer in Adolescence and Youth in Taiwan

Detailed description

This study uses the disease resilience model as a framework to explore the relationship between physical, mental, spiritual, and social aspects of resilience in adolescents with cancer and to verify the resilience model. It is expected that the research results will serve as a reference for designing nursing interventions in the future and develop local Resilience model to improve quality of care.

Interventions

None listed

Sponsors

Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_ONLY
Time perspective
CROSS_SECTIONAL

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
10 Years to 24 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Diagnosed with cancer before 18 years old * Aged between 10 and 24 years * Received cancer treatment or completed treatment

Exclusion criteria

* Diagnosis of mental problems (developmental delay or psychiatric illness) * At the end of life

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Herth Hope Index (HHI)1 yearHerth Hope Index (HHI) has 12 items. The12 items developed by Herth (1992) measures adults hope and contains three factors: cognitive-temporal (positive and desired outcome in the future), affective-behavioral (a feeling of confident with the reality-based goals and desirable outcomes), and affiliative-contextual (interconnect between self and others)(Herth, 1992). A higher score indicates a higher degree of hope.
Resilience in Illness Scale (HARS)1 yearHARS is a single factor scale, consisting of 13 items that measure how participants feel or think about managing their health since diagnosis. The internal consistency reliability (0.84 to 0.86) and content validity have been tested by previous qualitative research (Haase & Marcia, 1994; Haase & Philips, 2004). Participants are asked to mark how much they agree or disagree with each sentence using response options from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree) (Haase, et al., 1999). Higher total scores indicate a higher degree of resilience.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Jalowiec Coping Scale-Revised1 yearIt is developed from Jalowiec et al, (1984). There are 40 items. The test-retest reliability of the instrument is 0.79. The internal consistency within the subscale is between 0.85-0.86. The total scale α=0.78 and the subscale is 0.84 (question solution), 0.83 (defensive behavior) (Jalowiec et al, 1984).Higher total scores indicate a higher frequency of used coping behaviors.
Spiritual Perspective Scale (SPS)1 yearThe SPS was developed from Jalowiec et al, (1984). There are 40 questions in total. The test-retest reliability of the instrument is 0.79. The internal consistency within the subscale is between 0.85-0.86. The total scale α=0.78 and the subscale is 0.84 (question solution), 0.83 (defensive behavior) (Jalowiec et al, 1984).
Perceived Social Support (PSS)1 yearIt is developed from the Perceived Family Support Scale of Procidano & Heller (1983). The scale has 20 questions and Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficients are .88 and 0.91 (Procidano & Heller, 1983; Puskar & Bernardo, Stark, 2008).Higher total scores indicate a higher social support.
Symptom Distress Scale (SDS)1 yearSDS is developed from McCorkle & Young (1978), with a total of 13 questions, using a 1-5 scoring method. Higher of the total score, the higher the degree of symptom distress. The reliability of the instrument (r=.79-.89), using Ware's health perception scale test (r=0.9) (McCorkle, 1978). The reliability of the revised Chinese version is (Cronbach's α =.91-.96), the content validity index (CVI) is 0.95, and the readability is 0.95 (Lai, 1998). Higher total scores indicate a higher degree of symptom distress.
Self-Transcendence Scale1 yearThere are 15 questions, scored from 1 to 4. The higher the score, the higher the self-transcendence ability. The Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient of the tool is .70-.94 (Chen, 2009); the pretest Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient of the Chinese version of the literature is. 79, and the post-test Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient is .78 (Chen, 2009).
Family Adaptability and Cohesion Scale1 yearIt is developed from Olson, et al, (1985), with a total of 30 questions. The reliability of the instrument is .87 (cohesion) and .78 (adaptability) (Olson et al, 1985); the Chinese version of the document Cronbach's α\>0.6 (Fei, 1991).The higher the score is, the higher the family adaptability and cohesionself-transcendence.
Parent-Adolescent Communication1 yearIt is developed from Olson, McCubbin, Barnes, Larsen, Muxen, & Wilson, (1985). There are 30 questions, which can be divided into two subscales, with reliabilities of 0.87 and 0.78 respectively, using the confirmatory factor analysis (Olson et al. ,1985). The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the Chinese version of the father-child communication questionnaire is .76, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the mother-child communication questionnaire is .84(Chen, 2001). Higher scores indicate better communication.
Family Strengths1 yearIt is developed by Olson, McCubbin, Barnes, Larsen, Muxen, & Wilson (1985). There are 12 questions in the scale, and the items are: family self-esteem, family trust, family loyalty, family problem-solving ability, question options range from strongly agree to strongly disagree, the score range is from 12 to 60, the higher the score, the higher the family strength, the alpha reliability coefficients are .73 and .88, Test-retest reliability was .73 and .79.
mishel Uncertainty in Illness Scale - Revised1 yearIt is developed from the uncertainty scale developed by Mishel, 1981, with a total of 33 questions. The reliability of the instrument is 0.91. The reliability of each scale ranges from 0.64-0.89, and its validity has been verified through theory (Mishel, 1981). The internal consistency reliability of the Chinese version of the literature is Cronbach's α =0.87, the internal consistency of the subscales is 0.85 and 0.66, and the simultaneous validity is 0.571 (Xu & Huang, 1996). Higher total scores indicate a higher degree of uncertainty.

Countries

Taiwan

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026