Chelsea Moran

Background: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a common, distressing concern among cancer survivors, with implications for psychological well-being and quality of life. Despite the proliferation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess FCR, consensus on the most valid and reliable instruments remains limited. Objective: To conduct a comprehensive psychometric evaluation of FCR PROMs developed or validated between 2011 and 2023, using the full COSMIN methodology. This review builds on earlier work by systematically appraising both newly developed and adapted instruments to inform evidence-based PROM selection for clinical and research use. Methods: This review followed the COSMIN 10-step procedure and PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Six databases were searched from January 2011 to December 2023. A search cut-off of 31 December 2023 was applied to align with COSMIN feasibility recommendations and ensure sufficient time and resources for full psychometric evaluation across all included PROMs. Eligible studies included adults diagnosed with cancer and reported on the psychometric evaluation of a self-reported, Likert-scale-based FCR PROM. PROMs were appraised across eight psychometric properties using COSMIN’s Risk of Bias checklist, criteria for good measurement properties, and modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) for evidence quality. Instruments were categorized as A, B, or C according to COSMIN’s recommendations. Results: Of the 34 PROMs evaluated across 32 studies, 28 achieved COSMIN Category A status, indicating sufficient psychometric quality for clinical or research use. Among the 19 FCRI and FoP-Q instruments validated in new cultural or population contexts, 15 received a Category A rating, reflecting strong cross-cultural performance. Short forms such as the FCRI-SF and FoP-Q-SF demonstrated consistent psychometric strength across French, English, Portuguese, and Asian-language versions. Of the 14 newly developed PROMs—including the CWS-6, FCR4/7, CARQ-4, and FCR-1—12 achieved Category A. The FCR-1 was the only single-item PROM to demonstrate responsiveness, supporting its use in both screening and longitudinal monitoring. For practical guidance, five PROMs (FCR-1, FCRI-SF, FoP-Q-SF, FCR-7, and CWS) emerged as the most strongly supported for clinical use. Conclusions: This review provides a comprehensive evaluation of contemporary FCR PROMs and highlights substantial progress in the development of valid, reliable, and culturally adaptable tools. The FCRI, FoP-Q-SF, and several newly developed short forms, such as FCR7, CWS, and particularly, the FCR-1, emerge as strong candidates for use in clinical screening and longitudinal assessment. These findings offer clear evidence-based guidance for instrument selection in research and survivorship care. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023453783.

Background This scoping review aims to map the quantitative literature investigating vaccine-related individual and contextual determinants of COVID-19 vaccination uptake, identify and define constructs assessed, and describe the characteristics of self-report measures. Methods A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to capture peer-reviewed journal articles published between December 31, 2019, and December 25, 2021. Studies conducted in English and collecting data from general population samples using self-report measures of vaccine-related determinants of COVID-19 vaccination behavior were eligible. Data were analyzed using a descriptive statistics and content analysis, and constructs were mapped onto the COM-B model. The review pre-registration is available on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/82fsz). Results This review identified 157 studies (6153 abstracts and 997 full texts screened) and 425 vaccine-related constructs were retrieved from included studies. Of these, 4% were mapped to capability factors, 85% to motivation, and 11% to opportunity. The most frequently assessed constructs were positive attitudes (19% of constructs), negative attitudes (16%), intention (10%), and beliefs (8%). Only 11% of studies used or adapted pre-existing measures in their surveys. Psychometric properties of self-report measures used were not reported in the majority of studies (60%). Conclusions Findings suggest a predominant focus on perceived individual-level predictors of COVID-19 vaccination with inconsistent measurement, potentially compromising research validity. This research highlights opportunities to explore social/environmental factors, establish unified definitions, and employ validated self-report measures for robust survey-based studies on COVID-19 vaccination determinants.

Questionable research practices (QRPs) have been identified as a driving force of the replication crisis in the field of psychological science. The aim of this study was to assess the frequency and reasons for QRP use among psychology students in Canadian universities. Participants were psychology students attending Canadian universities recruited via online advertising and email invitations. Respondents were asked how often they and others engaged in seven QRPs, to estimate the proportion of psychology research impacted by each QRP and how acceptable they found each QRP. Data were collected through Likert-scale survey items and open-ended text responses between May 2020 and January 2021, and analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. 425 psychology students completed the survey (40% undergraduate, 59% graduate, 1% post-doctoral fellows). Overall, 64% of participants reported using at least one QRP, while 79% reported having observed others engaging in at least one QRP. The most frequently reported QRPs were p-hacking (46%), not submitting null results for publication (31%) and excluding outcome measures (30%). These QRPs were also the most frequently observed in others, estimated to be the most prevalent in the field, and rated as the most acceptable. Qualitative findings revealed that students are aware of external pressures that promote QRP use and offered several ideas for alternatives and solutions. The results of this study highlight the need to examine the pedagogical standards and cultural norms in academia that may promote or normalize QRPs in psychological science.

Background: Mask continue to be a necessity until a large proportion of the population, including children, receive immunizations for COVID-19. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between parental attitudes and beliefs about masks and parent-for-child mask behavior using the Theory of Planned Behavior.Method: We administered a survey in August 2020 to parents of school-aged children residing in the United States and Canada. Measures included sociodemographic variables for the parent and child, attitudes, norms and perceived control over children’s mask use, and enforcement of mask wearing among children (also titled “parent-for-child mask behavior”). Data were anlyzed using structural equation modelling. Results: We collected data from 866 parents and 43.5% had children with pre-existing health conditions (e.g., allergies, anxiety, impulsivity, skin sensitivity, asthma) that made extended mask wearing difficult. Among the full sample, negative attitudes (β=-.20, p = .006), norms (β = .41, p = .002), and perceived control (β = .33, p = .006) predicted intentions. Norms (β = .50, p = .004) and intentions (β = .28, p = .003) also predicted parent-for-child mask use, while attitudes and perceived control did not. Intentions mediated the associations between the predictors (attitudes, norms, perceived control) and outcome (mask behavior). Subgroup analyses revelaved intentions as the key predictor of parent-for-child mask use among children with pre-conditions and norms as the key predictor among children without pre-conditions.Conclusion: Future public health messaging should target parental intentions, attitudes and beliefs about masks wearing among children.

Background: Physical distancing, wearing face masks and hand hygiene are evidence-based methods to protect the public from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. There has been a proliferation of research examining characteristics that can be targeted by public health interventions. This rapid review sought to identify predictors of attitudes toward and adherence to COVID-19 public health guidelines, and identify interventions aiming to improve adherence. Methods: Articles were retrieved from multiple databases (e.g. MEDLINE, CINAHL and medRxiv) on 6 August 2020. Studies were limited to samples collected from Western countries. Studies were classified according to the types of factor (s) examined as independent variables. The consistency of evidence for each factor was scored by two reviewers. Results: In total, 1323 unique articles were identified in the initial search, resulting in 29 studies in the final synthesis. The available evidence suggests individuals who are older, identify as women, trust governments, perceive COVID-19 as threatening and access information through traditional news media are more likely to adhere with COVID-19 public health guidelines. Interventions for improving adherence have not yet been investigated thoroughly, and this review identified only three experimental studies. Conclusions: This review has identified several characteristics that impact attitudes and adherence to COVID-19 public health guidelines.

Purpose of Review To summarize and evaluate evidence available on the effects of yoga on cancer-associated cognitive decline (CACD). Recent Findings A systematic review was conducted using four databases of articles published before January 1, 2020. Ten articles met the inclusion criteria (six randomized controlled trials, two single-arm studies, one non-randomized controlled trial, and one case series study). Studies were predominantly conducted with breast cancer patients using low-intensity hatha yoga programs. Of the 10 articles, five reported some positive effects on CACD, but significant biases were possible due to design shortcomings. Cohen’s d effect sizes ranged from |0.03| to |0.74|. Summary The evidence to date is insufficient to suggest that yoga is beneficial for attenuating CACD. More rigorous trials controlling for non-specific factors are warranted. The field would also benefit from examining self-delivered modes of yoga for treating CACD in various cancer populations to enhance practice sustainability and generalizability.

Purpose The aim of this study is to examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Skin Cancer Index (SCI) in a sample of patients with melanoma. Methods This study uses data from an observational study with longitudinal follow-up examining predictors of skin self-examination in melanoma patients from Montréal, Canada. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to investigate the factor structure of the 15-item SCI scale. Correlations with other psychosocial measures of anxiety and depression, fear of cancer recurrence, quality of life, and emotional well-being were computed to examine construct validity. Results EFA results with 241 participants revealed a two-factor structure with acceptable fit and no significant cross-loadings. CFA results with a subsample of 173 participants examining the two-factor structure and second-order structure found equivalent fit for the two solutions. Cronbach’s alpha for the total scale score and both subscales was high. Both factors showed positive associations with measures of anxiety and depression and fear of cancer and negative associations with quality of life and emotional well-being. Conclusion Our study suggests that the SCI functions as a reliable two-factor scale assessing emotional and social distress in patients with melanoma, with the total SCI score assessing overall psychosocial distress.

This cross-sectional study collected data from 2013 participants recruited via social media. The study was conducted during a period of well-enforced regulations about social distancing. Adherence to social distancing recommendations was relatively high for most behaviours, but not nearly close to 100%. The study identified key modifiable barriers and facilitators of adherence to social distancing: strongest facilitators included wanting to protect the self, feeling a responsibility to protect the community, and being able to work/study remotely; strongest barriers included having friends or family who needed help with running errands, socializing in order to avoid feeling lonely, and seeing many people in the streets. Future interventions to improve adherence to social distancing measures should couple individual-level strategies targeting key barriers to social distancing identified herein, with effective institutional measures and public health interventions. Public health campaigns should continue to highlight compassionate attitudes towards social distancing.