The psychosocial impact of cancer: evidence in support of independent general positive and negative components
- 475 Downloads
Considerable research has demonstrated the negative psychosocial impact of cancer. Recent work has highlighted positive psychosocial outcomes. Research is now needed to evaluate the relationship between negative and positive impacts. This paper reports the development and validation of a measurement model capturing positive and negative psychosocial illness impacts.
The sample included 754 cancer patients on- or post-treatment. Item development was informed by literature review, expert input patient interviews and the results of a pilot study of 205 cancer patients, resulting in 43 positive and 46 negative items. Factor analyses were used to evaluate the dimensionality of the item pools. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to examine relationships between psychosocial illness impact and other variables.
Unidimensionality was demonstrated within but not across negative and positive impact items. ANOVA results showed differential relationships between negative and positive impacts, respectively, and patient sociodemographic and clinical variables.
Positive and negative psychosocial illness impacts are best conceptualized and measured as two independent factors. Computerized adaptive tests and short-form measures developed from this comprehensive psychosocial illness impact item bank may benefit future research and clinical applications.
KeywordsPsychosocial sequelae Cancer Cancer survivors Bi-factor analysis
This project was supported by the National Cancer Institute (CA60068, PI: David Cella). Special acknowledgements to Kelly Dineen, Ph.D. and Kimberly Davis, Ph.D. for their contributions to the item pool development used for the pilot study, and Jacquelyn George and Rachel Hanrahan for coordinating the study.
- 1.Charmaz, K. (2000). Experiencing chronic illness. In G. L. Albrecht, R. Fitzpatrick & S. C. Susan (Eds.), Handbook of social studies in health and medicine (pp. 277–292). London, Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
- 4.Kornblith, A. B. (1998). Psychosocial adaption of cancer survivors. In J. C. Holland (Ed.), Psycho-oncology (pp. 223–254). New York, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 6.Stanton, A. L., Collins, C. A., & Sworowski, L. A. (2001). Adjustment to chronic illness: Theory and research. In A. Baum, T. A. Revenson & J. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of health psychology (pp. 387–403). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- 8.Hewitt, M., et al. (2006). From cancer patient to cancer survivor: Lost in transition. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- 9.Adler, N. E., Page, A., & Institute of Medicine Committee on Psychosocial Services to Cancer Patients/Families in a Community. (2008). Cancer care for the whole patient: Meeting psychosocial health needs. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- 10.Reuben, S. H., et al., (2004). Living beyond cancer: Finding a new balance: President’s cancer panel 2003–2004 annual report. Washington, D.C.: US Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
- 12.Andrykowski, M. A., Brady, M. J., & Hunt, J. W. (1993). Positive psychosocial adjustment in potential bone marrow transplant recipients: Cancer as a psychosocial transition. Psycho-Oncology, 2(261), 276.Google Scholar
- 13.Antoni, M. H., & Carver, C. S. (2003). Cognitive behavioral stress management intervention effects on benefit finding in breast cancer patients. Psychosocial and physiological correlates. Paper presented at the society of behavioral medicine, twenty-fourth annual meeting. Salt Lake City, UT.Google Scholar
- 17.Park, C. L., & Lechner, S. C. (2006). Measurement issues in assessing growth following stressful life experiences. In L. G. Calhoun & R. G. Tedeschi (Eds.), Handbook of posttraumatic growth: Research and practice (pp. 47–67). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- 20.Taylor, S. E. (1983). Adjustment to Threatening Events: A Theory of Cognitive Adaptation. American Psychologist, 38(11), 1161–1173.Google Scholar
- 21.Tedeschi, R. G., Park, C. L., & Calhoun, L. G. (1998). Posttraumatic growth: Positive change in the aftermath of crisis. The LEA series in personality and clinical psychology. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- 24.Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (1995). Trauma and transformation: Growing in the aftermath of suffering. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- 35.Calhoun, L. G., & Tedeschi, R. G. (1991). Receiving benefits in traumatic events: Some issues for practicing psychologists. The Journal of Training and Practice in Professional Psychology, 5(1), 45–52.Google Scholar
- 42.Lai, J. S., Rosenbloom, S., & Cella, D. (2004). Using Item Response Theory (IRT) to build illness impact item banks in cancer. Presented at ‘Advances in Health Outcomes Measurement: Exploring the Current State and the Future Applications of Item response Theory, Item Banks, and Computer-adaptive Testing’ sponsored by Drug Information Association and National Cancer Institute. June 23–25. Bethesda, MD, U.S.A.Google Scholar
- 43.Lai, J. S., et al. (2004). Building core HRQL measures: Positive and negative psychological impact of cancer. Quality of Life Research, 13(9), 1503.Google Scholar
- 44.S. A. S. Institute Inc. (2003). SAS/STAT, Version 9.1. Cary, NC.Google Scholar
- 47.Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structure equation modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
- 51.McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
- 60.Stanton, A. L., Bower, J. E., & Low, C. A. (2006). Posttraumatic growth after cancer. In L. G. Calhoun & R. G. Tedeschi (Eds.), Handbook of posttraumatic growth: Research and practice (pp. 138–175). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Google Scholar
- 63.Cella, D., & Chang, C. H. (2000). A discussion of item response theory (IRT) and its applications in health status assessment. Medical Care, 38(9 Suppl), 1166–1172.Google Scholar
- 64.Cella, D., Chang, C. H., & Heinemann, A. W. (2002). Item Response Theory (IRT): Applications in quality of life measurement, analysis, and interpretation. In M. Mesbah, B. Cole & M. L. T. Lee (Eds.), Statistical methods for quality of life studies: Design, measurements, and analysis (pp. 169–186). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar