Validity and Reliability of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale Among Cancer Survivors in Korean Healthcare Contexts
2024

Validity and Reliability of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale Among Cancer Survivors in Korea

Sample size: 367 publication 10 minutes Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Yeom Hyun-E, Lee Jungmin, Kapritsou Maria, Sergentanis Theodoros N.

Primary Institution: Chungnam National University

Hypothesis

This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the Korean version of the Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (K-BPNSFS) in a cancer survivor population.

Conclusion

This study establishes the K-BPNSFS as a valid, reliable, and culturally relevant instrument for assessing the basic psychological needs of Korean cancer survivors.

Supporting Evidence

  • The K-BPNSFS confirmed a robust six-factor structure including satisfaction and frustration dimensions.
  • Convergent validity was supported by significant correlations with relevant constructs.
  • Reliability analysis demonstrated high internal consistency across all dimensions.

Takeaway

The study created a tool to help understand what cancer survivors in Korea need to feel happy and motivated, which can help them take better care of themselves.

Methodology

A cross-sectional design was employed, involving 367 community-dwelling cancer survivors, with construct validity assessed using confirmatory factor analysis.

Limitations

The findings have limited generalizability due to the focus on two independent samples of breast- and blood-cancer survivors and the exclusion of individuals with advanced or terminal-stage cancer.

Participant Demographics

The average age of participants was 54.87 years, with most being married (79.8%) and having an educational background beyond high school graduation (81.5%).

Statistical Information

P-Value

p < 0.001

Confidence Interval

90% CI: 0.043 to 0.057

Statistical Significance

p < 0.001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.3390/healthcare12242535

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication