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

Quality of Life Research

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 597-604

  Cooper, Andrew ^a   Aucote, Helen ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BALLARAT   (Australia)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Confirmatory factor analysis; MIMIC; Psychological morbidity; Screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CLINICAL TRIAL; COVARIANCE; DEMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; EMOTIONAL DISORDER; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FAMILY HISTORY; FEMALE; GROUPS BY AGE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PATIENT REFERRAL; PHYSICAL DISEASE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGIC ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES QUESTIONNAIRE; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; SOCIAL DISABILITY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; QUESTIONNAIRES; STRESS, PSYCHOLOGICAL;

EID: 67349189401     PISSN: 09629343     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-009-9472-4     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. JG Elmore K Armstrong CD Lehman SW Fletcher 2005 Screening for breast cancer Journal of the American Medical Association 293 1245 1256 10.1001/jama.293.10.1245
2. K Armstrong E Moye S Williams JA Berlin EE Reynolds 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
3. NT Brewer T Salz SE Lillie 2007 Systematic review: The long-term effects of false-positive mammograms Annals of Internal Medicine 146 502 510
4. J Brett J Austoker 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 10.1093/pubmed/23.4.292
5. G Meystre-Agustoni F Paccaud A Jeannin F Dubois-Arber 2001 Anxiety in a cohort of Swiss women participating in a mammographic screening programme Journal of Medical Screening 8 213 219 10.1136/jms.8.4.213
6. P Olsson K Armelius G Nordahl P Lenner G Westman 1999 Women with false positive screening mammograms: How do they cope? Journal of Medical Screening 6 89 93
7. J Brodersen H Thorsen J Cockburn 2004 The adequacy of measurement of short and long-term consequences of false-positive screening mammography Journal of Medical Screening 11 39 44 10.1258/096914104772950745
8. 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.
9. Goldberg, D., & Williams, P. (1988). A user's guide to the general health questionnaire. London: NFER-Nelson.
10. J Cockburn T De Luise S Hurley K Clover 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 10.1016/0277-9536(92)90286-Y
11. J Cockburn M Staples SF Hurley T De Luise 1994 Psychological consequences of screening mammography Journal of Medical Screening 1 7 12
12. AJ Rijnsburger ML Essink-Bot E van As J Cockburn HJ de Koning 2006 Measuring psychological consequences of screening: Adaptation of the psychological consequences questionnaire into Dutch Quality of Life Research 15 933 940 10.1007/s11136-005-5093-8
13. G Ong J Austoker J Brett 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
14. LR Fabrigar DT Wegener RC MacCallum EJ Strahan 1999 Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research Psychological Methods 4 272 299 10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
15. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus 4.2. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.
16. JH Steiger 1990 Structural model evaluation and modification: an interval estimation approach Multivariate Behavioral Research 25 173 180 10.1207/s15327906mbr2502-4
17. PM Bentler 1990 Comparative fit indexes in structural models Psychological Bulletin 107 238 246 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
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. LT Hu PM Bentler 1999 Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives Structural Equation Modeling 6 1 1 55
20. GW Cheung RB Rensvold 2002 Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance Structural Equation Modeling 9 2 233 255 10.1207/S15328007SEM0902-5
21. TD Little 1997 Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues Multivariate Behavioral Research 32 1 53 76 10.1207/s15327906mbr3201-3
22. HW Marsh JR Balla RP McDonald 1988 Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size Psychological Bulletin 103 3 391 410 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.391
23. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press.
24. BO Muthén 1989 Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations Psychometrika 54 557 585 10.1007/BF02296397
25. PJ Curran SG West JF Finch 1996 The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis Psychological Methods 1 1 16 29 10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.16
26. LK Muthén BO Muthén 2002 How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power Structural Equation Modeling 9 4 599 620 10.1207/S15328007SEM0904-8
27. J Cohen 1992 A power primer Psychological Bulletin 112 155 159 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
28. J Brodersen H Thorsen S Kreiner 2007 Validation of a condition-specific measure for women having an abnormal screening mammography Value in Health 10 4 294 304 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00184.x