Instrument

Table 1 Instrument Evaluation



Instrument Purpose & Items and Domains Question Conceptual Validity Reliability Responsiveness Burden

Administration Format and

Measurement Content Construct Internal Reproducibility

Model Validity Validity Consistency



CARES Find how 93-132 items; Five-point Competency- Literature. Correlated Domains  Subscales: Time: 10-45

(Cancer cancer affects 6 domains: physical, scale plus “do based model Interviews with with SCL-90, ranged from .88 r = .84 - .95 min;

Rehabilitation psychosocial, psychological, you want of coping. patients & KPS, DAS. to .92 87% agreement Reading

Evaluation physical & medical interaction, help: yes/no?” family. Expert Good n=71, level N/A;

System) behaviors marital, sexual, review. agreement time=1 week Acceptability

miscellaneous with : most found

Patient interviewers. it easy to

completes use.

CARES-SF Shortens the 38-57 items; Five-point Selected from Correlated well Domains  Dimensions: Find physical, Time N/A;

(Cancer CARES for 5 domains: scale plus “do the CARES by with CARES, ranged from .60 r=.69 - .92 psychosocial Reading

Rehabilitation use with physical, you want help experts FLIC, KPS, to .84 81%-86% change with level N/A;

Evaluation clinical trials psychological, (yes/no)?” DAS. Large agreement time Correlated Acceptable

System-Short medical sample sizes. n=120, time=10 with FLIC @ 1, N/A.

Form) Patient interaction, days 7, 14 mo post-

completes marital, sexual diagnosis

CPNS Measures the 51 items; “Importance”: Interviews with Overall: 0.91 Time: 2-45

(Cancer Patient importance of 5 domains: coping, seven-point nurses, Importance: .83- min;

Need Survey) needs and the help, information, Likert scale; patients, & .93 Reading

degree to work, and cancer “how well caregivers How well met: level N/A;

which their shock met”: seven- using .79-.95 Acceptabili

Patient General









needs are met point Likert Objective Domain: = .88 ty: reported

scale Content Test & to .92 no

Patient Q-sort method problems

completes when used.

CPNQ Assesses 71 items; Five-point Literature. Discriminant Domains  Intercorrelation Time: 20

(Cancer Patient unmet needs 5 domains: scale: “what Interviews. validity: able to ranged from .78 all significant min;;

Need of people with psychological needs, is your level Expert review. distinguish to .90 kappa > .4 Reading

Questionnaire) cancer health info, ADLs, of need for Pilot test. patients with n=124, level: 4th or

patient care/support, help?” different disease time=10-14 days 5th grade;

Patient interpersonal stages. Acceptabili

completes communication ty: 25%

non-

completion

rate.

SCNS Assesses 61 items; Five-point Factor Based on Domain  Time: 20

(Supportive impact of 5 domains: scale: “what analysis. CPNQ. ranged from .87 min;

Care Needs cancer on psychological needs, is your level Expert review. to .97 Reading

Survey) lives of health information, of need for Pilot test. level: 5th

cancer physical/daily living help?” grade;

patients needs, patient care Acceptability

& support, and : patients

Patient sexuality found it

completes understandab

le, 35% non-

completion.

Instrument Purpose & Items and Domains Question Conceptual Validity Reliability Responsiveness Burden

Administration Format and

Measurement Content Construct Internal Reproducibility

Model Validity Validity Consistency



HCS-PF Assesses 33 items; Agreement Based on Poor Domains  Time: N/A;

(Home Care attitudes of 2 domains with five- scales by discriminant ranged from Reading

Study-Patient terminally & Satisfaction with: point Likert Zyranski and validity. 0.10-0.75 level: N/A;

Form) chronically ill care availability, scale Ware; Acceptability

patients care continuity, MD Pilot test : N/A.

toward availability, MD

medical care competence, MD

personality, MD

Interview; communication,

patient may general satisfaction

be able to Preference: home

complete care, decision-

making

NEQ Assess needs of 23 items; Agreement Factor Interviews. Domains:  Cohen’s kappa Time: 5 min;

(Need hospitalized 3 domains: helps with yes/no analysis. Pilot tests. ranged from .69- ranged from .54- Reading

Evaluation cancer patients diagnosis/prognosis, statement .81 .94 level N/A;

Questionnaire) in clinical exam/treatment, Acceptability

setting communication & Time=1week : 63% of

relations patients OK;

Patient 24% in-

completes complete;

Patient General









3% missing

data.

PNAT Screen cancer 16 items; Five-item Literature. Physical domain Domains:  Interrater Time: 20-30

(Patient Needs patients for 3 domains: impairment Clinical correlates with ranged from .85- reliability: min.;

Assessment physical & physical, scale for each experience. KPS; .94 Friedman: .87, Training

Tool) psychological psychological, and area within Psychological .76, .73; level: low;

functioning social domain with GAIS, BSI Spearman rank Acceptablity:

problems MPAS, BDI order: .59- .98 N/A.

Social with

Part of ISEL.

clinician

interview

PNI Measure the 48 items; 7 Five-point Literature. Discriminant  > .7 for each Time: N/A;

(Psychosocial unmet domains: related to “Importance” Interviews. validity: of the first six Read level:

Needs psychosocial health scale Focus group. detected the domains. N/A;

Inventory) needs of professionals, Five-point differences Acceptabili

cancer information needs, “Satisfaction” among needs at ty: 59%

patients and related to support scale four critical non-

their networks, identify movements of response

caregivers. needs, emotional cancer rate and the

and spiritual, trajectory. characterist

Patient & practical and ic of the

caregiver childcare need. non-

complete respondents

was

examined.

Table 1 (continued)



Instrument Purpose & Items and Question Conceptual Validity Reliability Responsiveness Burden

Administration Domains Format and

Measurement Content Construct Internal Reproducibility

Model Validity Validity Consistency



PCNA Measures the 135 items; Ten-point Literature. Correlated with Agreement on R = .97 Time: 43

(Prostate Cancer importance and 3 domains: “Importance” Interviews overall classification by time=2 weeks min;

Needs unmet needs of information, scale using Critical satisfaction- three researchers Reading

Assessment) men with support, and Ten-point Incident with-care. working level: 7th

prostate cancer care delivery “Extent Need Technique & independently grade;

Met” scale Nominal Acceptabili

Patient Group. ty: 11%

completes Expert review. non-

completion.

PINQ Measures the 17 items; Four-point Factor Literature. Correlated with Domains:  Detected the Time: N/A;

(Patient information 2 domains: scale analysis. Interviews. RSC, State- ranged from .88- changing Reading

Information need among disease-oriented Similar Anxiety .92; needs of level: N/A;

Need cancer patients and information structure was Inventory & Inter-item patients at Acceptabili

Questionnaire) for the about access to found across MMPI D-scale. correlation >0.2 three time ty: reasons

improvement of help & solution Hodgkins; points before to refuse:

clinical practice breast cancer and after first not wanting

and research patients and treatment to be

Patient General









over time. reminded

Patient of their

completes illness,

feeling too

old, etc.

DINA Measures the 144 items; Check the need Theory of Expert review. Domain: 80% - 100% Detected Time: N/A;

(The Derdiarian informational 4 domains: present and information  exceeded 0.9 agreement found difference reading level

Informational needs of cancer disease, personal, rate seeking. for all domains using McNemar between N/A;

Needs patients family, and social importance on Needs and test control group Acceptability

Assessment) relationship. 10-point scale hierarchy of time=15-20 min. and : N/A.

Interview needs. experimental

group

INM Assess the 9 information Control Based on the Literature. Kendall zeta: Time: N/A;

(Information priority of categories. preference theoretical Based on .95-.99. Reading

Needs Measure) informational scale; ranking framework of works by Kendall level: N/A;

needs of cancer of Derdiarian Derdiarian coefficient of Acceptabili

patients informational Expert review. agreement: .20- ty: N/A.

resources; .35.

Patient prioritization

compeletes of

information

needs

Instrument Purpose & Items and Question Conceptual Validity Reliability Responsiveness Burden

Administration Domains Format and

Measurement Content Construct Internal Reproducibility

Model Validity Validity Consistency



TINQ-BC Identify 51 items; Five-point Literature. Correlated with Overall =.97; Time: 20

(Toronto information 5 domains: “Importance” Nurse the information Domains min;;

Informational needed by diagnosis, scale opinions. scale of HOS.  ranged from .73 Reading

Patient General









Needs women with tests, treatments, to .93; Correlation level: N/A;

Questionnaire- recent breast physical, of subscales to Acceptability

Breast Cancer) cancer diagnosis psychosocial total scale: : OK

to deal with .38 - .88

illness



Patient

completes

PACA Assess 12 items; Four-point Interviews of Symptom scores Kappa ranged Sensitivity to Time: few

(Palliative Care effectiveness of 3 domains: scale, except patients. correlated with from .44 –1 detected min.;

Assessment ) hospital’s symptom five-point McCorkle statistically Training

palliative care control, insight, scale for symptom significant level:

program and future insight distress scale intervention N/A;

placement effects Acceptability

Professional : N/A.

completes

STAS Assess quality of 17 items; Five-point Literature. Correlated with Interrater Detected Time: 2 min.

(Support Team palliative care of 8 domains: Likert scale Clinical patient & family reliability: 90% improvement for existing

Assessment multi-disciplinary pain/symptom experience. score, Karnofsky agreement in palliative patients, 5

Schedule) cancer support control, insight, score, Spitzer except care min. new

teams psychosocial, QOL index. predictability patients;

family needs, Support team Evaluated 2 Training

Stage Specific









Professional home services, scores correlate palliative care level: N/A;

completes planning affairs, with patient & support teams Acceptability

support of other family scores. : N/A.

professionals,

communication

NEST Measure 135 items; Five-point Frame for a Literature. Domains:  Time: N/A;

(The Needs experiences of 8 domains: Likert scale good death. Interviews & ranged from Reading

Near the End-of- end-of-life patient-MD Factor focus groups. 0.63-0.85 at level N/A;

Life Care patients & relations, social analysis. Symptom baseline and Acceptabili

Screening Tool) possibly assess connection, Measurement items from 0.64-0.89 at ty: 69.2%

impact of caregiving need, invariance other scales. follow up patients

interventions psychological across Pilot tests. found

distress, sociodemogra Expert review. interview

Interview; spirituality, phic strata. helpful.

patient personal Item response

completes if acceptance, have theory on the

possible purpose, clinician short version

communication

Table 1 (continued)



Instrument Purpose & Items and Question Conceptual Validity Reliability Responsiveness Burden

Administration Domains Format and

Measurement Content Construct Internal Reproducibility

Model Validity Validity Consistency



FAMCARE Measure family 20 items; Five-point Interviews. Correlated with Overall : 0.93; R = .92 Time: 22

satisfaction with4 domains: Likert Family ranking McCusker & Domains:  n=23, min;

advanced cancer information “Satisfaction of items. with overall ranged from .61- time < 23 hrs Reading

care giving, scale” Q-sort. satisfaction .88 level: N/A;

care availability, with care Acceptabili

Family physical care, questions. ty: N/A.

completes pain control, and

2 other items

FIN Measure needs of 20 items, 1 Ten-point Fulfillment Literature. Correlated with Overall  for Time:

(Family cancer patient’s domain “importance” theory; factor Items from FAMCARE. “importance” “short”;

Inventory of family & extent scale and analysis. original Critical scale: 0.83 Reading

Needs) needs are met met/unmet Care Family level: N/A;

check Needs Inventory. Acceptability

Family Family review. : N/A.

completes

FIN-H Measure 30 items; Five-point Factor Based on FIN Overall  Importance Time: 16-30

Caregiver









(Family information 5 domains: “Importance” analysis. Pilot test. ranged from .90- subscale: min;

Inventory of needs of surgical care subscale and .93; r=0.82, Need Reading

Needs- husbands of needs, three-point 73%-87% of Met subscale: level: N/A;

Husbands) women with communication “Need Met” items: item-total r=.79 Acceptability

breast cancer with MD, family subscale correlation 0.4- time: < 24 hrs :

relations, 0.7 12 husbands

Husband diagnosis/treatme refused to

completes nt specifics, complete.

husband’s

involvement

HCNS Measures the 90 items; Seven-point Lackey- Statements from Psychological, Overall : 0.93, Detected Time: 30

(Home importance and 6 domains: “Importance” Wingate patients & home patient care, 0.98; Domains: changing min;

Caregiver Need satisfaction of the information, subscale and model caregivers. personal and  ranged from caregiver needs Reading:

Survey) needs of household, seven-point Expert household .85-.97 at 3 time points 5th grade

caregivers. patient care, “Satisfaction” evaluation. Domains level;

personal, subscale Pilot test. correlated with Acceptabili

Caregiver spiritual, and KPSS ty:

completes psychological caregivers

OK.

Instrument Purpose & Items and Question Conceptual Validity Reliability Responsiveness Burden

Administration Domains Format and

Measurement

Model Content Construct Internal Reproducibility

Validity Validity Consistency



HCS-CF Assess attitude of 42 items; Agreement Based on Good Domains:  Time: N/A;

(Home Care terminally & 2 domains: with five- scales by discriminant ranged from .50- Reading

Study – chronically ill Satisfaction with point Likert Zyranski and validity .85 level: N/A;

Caretaker Form) caretakers toward care: scale Ware. Acceptability

medical care of availability, Pilot test. : N/A.

their patients continuity,

MD availability,

Interview; MD competence,

patient may be MD personality,

able to complete MD

communication,

Caregiver









general

satisfaction

Preference for:

home care,

decision making

NSS Assess the 9 items Five-point Literature. Unmet needs Overall : 0.84; Time: 15

(Need intensity and ”Felt need” Expert review. correlated with “Felt need” min;

Satisfaction satisfaction of subscale and overall subscale: 0.74; Reading

Scale) the needs of five-point satisfaction with “Met need” level: N/A;

bereaved “Met need” care subscale: 0.84. Acceptabili

families subscale ty: N/A.



Family

completes

ISNQ Assess 29 items; Four-point Literature. Domains:  Time: 37

(Information information & 2 domains: “Importance” Interviews. ranged from .92- min;

and Support support needs of information and subscale and .95 Reading

Needs women who have support Four-point level:

Questionnaire) primary relative “Need Met” “middle”

Relative









with breast cancer subscale class;

Acceptabili

Self-complete ty:

“several”

reported it

didn’t

apply.

Table 2 : Domain Item Distribution Across Instrument

Instruments  CARES CARES- CPNS CPQ SCN HCS NEQ PNAT PNI PCNA PINQ DINA INM TINQ- PACA STAS NEST FAM FIN FIN HCNS HCS NSS ISNQ

SF S -PF BC CARE -H -CF

# Items  93 - 38 - 51 71 61 33 23 16 48 135 17 144 9 51 10 17 20 20 30 89 42 20 29

Domain  132 57

Pain 1 1 3 5

Symptom Ctrl 7 1

Physical 26 10 9 6 11

Cancer Shock 11

Psychological 44 17 16 22 5 5  30

Psychosocial 2

Spiritual 1  6

Insight 1 1

Sexuality 8 3 3 1

Personal  1  11 20

Marital 18 6

Caregiving needs  6

Family  2 3 2

Social 5   6

Communication 2  3 

Planning 1

Other Prof 2 6 14

Information 10 10 15 64 4 18

Diagnostic Info  9  1 9

Treatment Info  2 16

Investigative Info 7

Daily Living 7

Work 5 12

Household

Activity Mgt

Coping 16

Future Placemt 1 5 7

Sense of purpose  2

Participation 3 3 8

MD. Interaction 11 4 2  4

MD/Care 8 6 16

Availability

MD Competence 4 4

Patient Care 8 8 4

Continuity of C 4 9

Home Care 4 1

Access to Care 4

Care delivery 35 2 20

Support 36 11

Financial 1

Help 9 8

Other 32 19 4 2 1



 unclear numbers of items