4.5 Article

Evaluating the Dimensionality of Perceived Cognitive Function

Journal

JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT
Volume 37, Issue 6, Pages 982-995

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2008.07.012

Keywords

Perceived cognitive function; bi-factor analysis; dimensionality

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute [CA60068, CA125671]
  2. National Institutes of Health [U01 AR 052177-01]
  3. Department of Defense [DAMD 17-03-1-0138]
  4. University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Decrements in cognitive function art common in cancer patients and other clinical populations. As direct neuropsychological testing is often not feasible or affordable, there is potential utility in screening for deficits that, may warrant a more comprehensive neuropsychological assessment. Furthermore, some evidence suggests that perceived cognitive function (PCF) is independently associated with structural and functional changes on neuroimagery, and may precede more overt deficits. To appropriately measure PCF, one must understand its components and the underlying dimensional structure. The purpose of this study was to examine the dimensionality of PCF in people with cancer The sample included 393 cancer patients from four clinical trials who completed a questionnaire consisting of the prioritized areas of concerns identified by patients and clinicians: self-reported mental acuity, concentration, memory, verbal fluency, and functional interference. Each area contained both, negatively worded (i.e., deficit) and positively worded (i.e., capability) items. Data were analyzed by using Cronbach's alpha, item-total correlations, one factor confirmatory factor analysis, and a bi-factor analysis model. Results indicated that perceived cognitive problem. items are distinct from cognitive capability items, supporting a two-factor structure of PCF Scaring of PCF based on these two factors should, lead to improved assessment of PCF for people with cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage 2009;37:982-995. (C) 2009 U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available