Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-06-2009

Measuring the psychological consequences of breast cancer screening: a confirmatory factor analysis of the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire

Auteurs: Andrew Cooper, Helen Aucote

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 5/2009

Abstract

vorige artikel Measuring stigma across neurological conditions: the development of the stigma scale for chronic illness (SSCI)

volgende artikel Psychometric evaluation of the WHOQOL-BREF in community-dwelling older people in Taiwan using Rasch analysis

Elmore, J. G., Armstrong, K., Lehman, C. D., & Fletcher, S. W. (2005). Screening for breast cancer. Journal of the American Medical Association, 293, 1245–1256. doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1245.PubMedCrossRef

Armstrong, K., Moye, E., Williams, S., Berlin, J. A., & Reynolds, E. E. (2007). Screening mammography in women 40 to 49 years of age: A systematic review for the American College of Physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine, 146, 516–526.PubMed

Brewer, N. T., Salz, T., & Lillie, S. E. (2007). Systematic review: The long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Annals of Internal Medicine, 146, 502–510.PubMed

Brett, J., & Austoker, J. (2001). Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: Psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. Journal of Public Health Medicine, 23(4), 292–300. doi:10.1093/pubmed/23.4.292.PubMedCrossRef

Meystre-Agustoni, G., Paccaud, F., Jeannin, A., & Dubois-Arber, F. (2001). Anxiety in a cohort of Swiss women participating in a mammographic screening programme. Journal of Medical Screening, 8, 213–219. doi:10.1136/jms.8.4.213.PubMedCrossRef

Olsson, P., Armelius, K., Nordahl, G., Lenner, P., & Westman, G. (1999). Women with false positive screening mammograms: How do they cope? Journal of Medical Screening, 6, 89–93.PubMed

Brodersen, J., Thorsen, H., & Cockburn, J. (2004). The adequacy of measurement of short and long-term consequences of false-positive screening mammography. Journal of Medical Screening, 11, 39–44. doi:10.1258/096914104772950745.PubMedCrossRef

Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R., Lushene, R., Vagg, P. R., & Jacobs, G. A. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory (form Y). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Goldberg, D., & Williams, P. (1988). A user’s guide to the general health questionnaire. London: NFER-Nelson.

10.

Cockburn, J., De Luise, T., Hurley, S., & Clover, K. (1992). Development and validation of the PCQ: A questionnaire to measure the psychological consequences of screening mammography. Social Science and Medicine, 34(10), 1129–1134. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(92)90286-Y.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Cockburn, J., Staples, M., Hurley, S. F., & De Luise, T. (1994). Psychological consequences of screening mammography. Journal of Medical Screening, 1, 7–12.PubMed

12.

Rijnsburger, A. J., Essink-Bot, M. L., van As, E., Cockburn, J., & de Koning, H. J. (2006). Measuring psychological consequences of screening: Adaptation of the psychological consequences questionnaire into Dutch. Quality of Life Research, 15, 933–940. doi:10.1007/s11136-005-5093-8.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Ong, G., Austoker, J., & Brett, J. (1997). Breast screening: Adverse psychological consequences one month after placing women on early recall because of a diagnostic uncertainty. A multicentre study. Journal of Medical Screening, 4, 158–168.PubMed

14.

Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272–299. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272.CrossRef

15.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus 4.2. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

16.

Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: an interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4.CrossRef

17.

Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

19.

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRef

20.

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5.CrossRef

21.

Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32(1), 53–76. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3201_3.CrossRef

22.

Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 391–410. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.391.CrossRef

23.

Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press.

24.

Muthén, B. O. (1989). Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Psychometrika, 54, 557–585. doi:10.1007/BF02296397.CrossRef

25.

Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 16–29. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.16.CrossRef

26.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(4), 599–620. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0904_8.CrossRef

27.

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Brodersen, J., Thorsen, H., & Kreiner, S. (2007). Validation of a condition-specific measure for women having an abnormal screening mammography. Value in Health, 10(4), 294–304. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00184.x.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Measuring the psychological consequences of breast cancer screening: a confirmatory factor analysis of the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire
Auteurs: Andrew Cooper
Helen Aucote
Publicatiedatum: 01-06-2009
Uitgeverij: Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 5/2009
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9472-4

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2009

Questions never asked. Positive family outcomes of extremely premature childbirth

Psychometric evaluation of the WHOQOL-BREF in community-dwelling older people in Taiwan using Rasch analysis

How to guarantee finding a statistically significant difference: the use and abuse of subgroup analyses

Modification, translation and adaptation of questionnaires should copyright laws be observed?

Measuring stigma across neurological conditions: the development of the stigma scale for chronic illness (SSCI)

Alternative approaches to derive disability weights in injuries: do they make a difference?