Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT06179914

Resilience Models in Adolescence and Youth With Cancer in Taiwan

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

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

10 year–24 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

Primary location

Kaohsiung Medical University

Kaohsiung City, 80361, Taiwan

About this study

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.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

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

Treatment and study plan

Primary outcomes

  1. Herth Hope Index (HHI)

    Time frame: 1 year

    Herth 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.

  2. Resilience in Illness Scale (HARS)

    Time frame: 1 year

    HARS 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 outcomes

  1. Symptom Distress Scale (SDS)

    Time frame: 1 year

    SDS 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.

  2. mishel Uncertainty in Illness Scale - Revised

    Time frame: 1 year

    It 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.

  3. Jalowiec Coping Scale-Revised

    Time frame: 1 year

    It 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.

  4. Spiritual Perspective Scale (SPS)

    Time frame: 1 year

    The 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).

  5. Perceived Social Support (PSS)

    Time frame: 1 year

    It 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.

  6. Family Strengths

    Time frame: 1 year

    It 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.

  7. Self-Transcendence Scale

    Time frame: 1 year

    There 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).

  8. Family Adaptability and Cohesion Scale

    Time frame: 1 year

    It 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.

  9. Parent-Adolescent Communication

    Time frame: 1 year

    It 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.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital

Other

Registry information

Official study title

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

Important dates

Study start
2020
Primary completion
2022
Study completion
2022
First posted
Dec 22, 2023
Registry last updated
Dec 22, 2023

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.