COSMIN database

Work-related self-report measures and assessment tools in cancer survivorship: a systematic literature review

Authors:
Ladehoff, N., Sturm, K., and Mehnert, A.
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To systematically review and appraise studies examining self-report questionnaires measuring work-related aspects in cancer patients.

METHOD: Literature search methodology: Searches in Embase, PsycINFO, PSYNDEXplus, PSYNDEXplus Tests and PubMed for the period 1990-2011 were completed. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (i) the questionnaire measures work-related aspects; (ii) the questionnaire has been used in at least one study, which involved cancer patient as a relevant target group; and (iii) articles were written in English or German.

RESULTS: Twenty-two articles out of 350 records were reviewed and 13 questionnaires identified. The majority of measures cover several dimensions of work-related aspects representing a variety of work-related experiences and constructs such as aspects of the work environment, demands at work and work-related interpersonal relations. Nine of the 13 questionnaires showed good internal consistency whereas subscales of four instruments had fair or poor internal consistency. For 12 out of 13 measures, validity and reliability were tested in non-cancer populations.

CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge about reliability and validity of self-report questionnaires measuring work-related aspects in cancer patients is scarce and more high-quality validation studies are needed. Findings further emphasize the need for the development of valid multidimensional measures that are relevant for both research and rehabilitative occupational interventions.
DOI:
10.3109/09638288.2012.688921
URL:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22697459
Journal:
Disabil Rehabil
issn:
1464-5165 (Electronic)
Publication year:
2013
pages:
100-12
Age:
Adults (18-65)
Children (0-18)
Seniors (65+)
Disease:
Neoplasms and related symptoms
PRO / non-PRO:
Patient Reported Outcome
Type of measurement instrument:
1 - Questionnaires
6 - Clinical rating scales