ArticlePatient preference and adherence2026
Development, Reliability, and Validity of the Treatment Decision-Making Needs Assessment Scale for Chinese Cancer Patients.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To construct a Treatment Decision-making Needs Assessment Scale for cancer patients in China. Patients and Methods: Referring to the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF), along with the literature review of domestic and international papers and the existing related scales, we constructed an item pool of the scale. The initial version of the scale was developed as expert correspondence. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were performed in separate samples. The reliability and validity of the scale were tested by examining 407 cancer patients. Results: The Treatment Decision-making Needs Assessment Scale for cancer patients comprised three dimensions: Decision-making cognition, Disease knowledge, and Support and resource acquisition, and 15 items. The Cronbach's α coefficient of the total scale was 0.833, while the test-retest reliability was 0.856. The total content validity index was 0.906. Three factors were extracted using EFA, with a cumulative variance contribution rate of 66.82%. CFA indicated adequate model fit. Conclusion: The Treatment Decision-making Needs Assessment Scale for Chinese cancer patients demonstrates acceptable reliability and validity, and may be useful for measuring treatment-related decisional needs among Chinese cancer patients in clinical practice and future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.