Initial validation of the Danish version of the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI) in colorectal cancer patients
- 96 Downloads
The Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI) is a multidimensional measure for fear of cancer recurrence (FCR). The aim of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the translated Danish version of the FCRI in a population of colorectal cancer patients.
The English version of the FCRI was forward–backward translated into Danish and pilot tested in a gynaecological cancer population. The psychometric properties of the FCRI were assessed in terms of responsiveness, test–retest reliability and discriminative and convergent validity in a population of colorectal cancer patients by asking them to complete questionnaires at three time points during follow-up. Clinical FCR was defined as ≥ 16 at the FCRI short form.
The participation rate was 57%. A low association was found between higher scores on the FCRI and younger age (r = − 0.29, p = 0.02). A moderate correlation was found between the FCRI score and a measure for worry traits (r = 0.49, p < 0.001). Mean difference in total FCRI score was statistically significant between ‘pre-scan’ and ‘postscan’ (p < 0.001), thus indicating that the FCRI was responsive to change. The FCRI score showed good test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation = 0.84).
The Danish version of the FCRI is a reliable and responsive measure for FCR in colorectal cancer patients and shows acceptable discriminative and convergent validity.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
A valid measure for FCR is crucial in order to identify patients with a need for special attention or interventions for high levels of FCR and to improve future research into FCR among cancer survivors.
KeywordsCancer survivorship Fear of recurrence Translation, validity and responsiveness Inventory Colorectal cancer
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 6.Butow PN, Fardell JE, Smith AB. Fear of cancer recurrence: an overview and Australian perspective. Cancer Forum. 2015;39(2):95–100.Google Scholar
- 26.Cull A, Sprangers MA, Bjordal K, Aaronson N. On behalf of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life study group. EORTC quality of life study group translation procedure. Brussels: EORTC; 1998. p. 26.Google Scholar
- 27.Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(4):539–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Postoperativ kontrol. In: DCCG’s nationale retningslinjer for diagnostik og behandling af kolorektal cancer. Danish Colorectal Cancer Group. 2012. https://dccg.dk/retningslinjer/kolorektal-cancer/#1502740937827-631f3f44-4ddd. Accessed 10 Dec 2016.
- 30.Anthoine E, Moret L, Regnault A, Sebille V, Hardouin JB. Sample size used to validate a scale: a review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-014-0176-2.
- 32.Hvenegaard M, Watkins ER, Poulsen S, Rosenberg NK, Gondan M, Grafton B, et al. Rumination-focused cognitive behaviour therapy vs. cognitive behaviour therapy for depression: study protocol for a randomised controlled superiority trial. Trials. 2015;16 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0875-y.