Table of Contents
Abstract
Psychological empowerment and Self-advocacy are critical components of navigating chronic illness, particularly in oncology. For female cancer patients, who often face unique psychosocial burdens and systemic barriers in healthcare, the ability to advocate for one's own needs is paramount. The Female Self-advocacy in Cancer survivorship (FSACS) scale was originally developed to quantify this vital skill. The present adaptation introduces the FSACS-C, a culturally tailored and psychometrically validated version designed specifically for Chinese populations.
By translating this instrument, researchers have provided a standardized method to evaluate how effectively female patients in China gather resources, communicate with medical teams, and assert their needs during their cancer journey. The availability of this validated tool allows researchers to move beyond qualitative descriptions of Patient empowerment, offering a rigorous quantitative metric to assess how Self-advocacy impacts long-term rehabilitation and quality of life.
📊 Psychometric Scorecard
20
Multidimensional
📍 China
Authors
Purpose
In the realm of psycho-oncology, there is a recognized disparity in how male and female patients experience and report symptoms, distress, and emotional needs. Women frequently require nuanced support structures to navigate the complexities of cancer treatment and survivorship. However, without a validated measurement tool, clinicians in China have struggled to systematically identify which patients possess strong Self-advocacy skills and which are at risk of having their needs unmet.
The FSACS-C bridges this critical methodological gap. It equips healthcare providers and researchers with a reliable metric to assess Patient empowerment, ultimately facilitating targeted interventions that encourage active participation in clinical decision-making and personalized symptom management. By identifying barriers to Self-advocacy, clinical teams can better tailor their communication and support strategies to foster improved survivorship outcomes.
Construct
The psychological construct of Self-advocacy in the context of Cancer survivorship goes beyond mere assertiveness. It represents a multifaceted coping mechanism where an individual internalizes available information and resources, transforming them into actionable behaviors to overcome illness-related challenges.
In the Chinese adaptation of the scale, this construct is operationalized through three distinct but interconnected dimensions. The first dimension captures the patient's capacity to recognize and articulate their personal needs. The second focuses on the interpersonal dynamics of navigating the medical system, specifically the ability to communicate effectively with healthcare professionals. The final dimension reflects the mobilization of social capital, assessing how well the individual can draw upon their broader social networks for emotional and practical support.
Validity
Establishing the validity of a translated psychometric tool requires rigorous cross-cultural adaptation to ensure the construct retains its original meaning while resonating with the target demographic. The developers of the FSACS-C employed a comprehensive forward-backward translation protocol, supplemented by three rounds of cognitive interviewing with 25 participants. This qualitative step is crucial for confirming face validity, as it ensures the phrasing of items is interpreted consistently across diverse educational and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Quantitatively, the scale demonstrated excellent item discrimination (p < 0.05 for all items), meaning each question effectively differentiated between individuals with high and low levels of Self-advocacy. Furthermore, the absence of floor or ceiling effects (with extreme scores representing less than 15% of the sample) indicates that the instrument is sensitive enough to capture the full spectrum of the construct within the clinical population.
Reliability
The validation study confirmed the overall reliability of the FSACS-C, establishing it as a dependable measure for clinical and research applications. In psychometric terms, establishing reliability ensures that the scale measures the construct of Self-advocacy with minimal measurement error, yielding consistent results across the target population.
A reliable instrument is foundational for longitudinal studies or clinical trials, as it guarantees that any observed changes in a patient's Self-advocacy score over time reflect genuine shifts in their psychological state or the efficacy of an intervention, rather than statistical noise inherent to the questionnaire itself.
Factor Analysis
To rigorously evaluate the underlying structure of the translated scale, the researchers utilized a split-sample design with their 436 participants, a gold-standard approach in psychometrics that allows for both the exploration and subsequent confirmation of a factor model. During the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), the team notably employed Parallel Analysis rather than relying on the traditional, often flawed, Kaiser criterion of eigenvalues greater than one.
Parallel Analysis is a more robust statistical technique that compares actual eigenvalues to randomly generated data matrices, thereby preventing the over-extraction of factors. This sophisticated approach revealed a three-factor structure. Subsequently, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) on the second half of the dataset verified that this tripartite model provided an acceptable fit to the data, aligning perfectly with the theoretical framework of Self-advocacy.
Subscales
| Subscale | Items | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Expressing Needs | Measures the patient's ability to recognize, articulate, and advocate for their personal and emotional requirements during Cancer survivorship. | |
| Communicating with Healthcare Providers | Assesses the patient's capacity to engage in effective, bidirectional dialogue with medical staff and actively participate in clinical decision-making. | |
| Gaining Support from Social Networks | Evaluates the individual's ability to mobilize and utilize emotional and practical resources from family, friends, and broader social circles. |
Instrument
| Test Type | Self-report questionnaire |
| Format | 20 items |
| Language | Chinese |
| Population | Medical patients |
| Age Group | 18-79 years |
| Administration | Paper-and-pencil |
Chinese version of the Female Self-Advocacy in Cancer Survivorship scale Items
Items are currently not available
The individual items of this scale are not publicly available. Researchers interested in using this instrument should contact the original authors directly to request the scale materials.
Sample
The validation sample consisted of 436 female cancer survivors recruited from a tertiary Cancer Center in China. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 79 years (Mean = 49.7, SD = 12.4). The cohort represented diverse oncological diagnoses, predominantly including breast, colorectal, cervical, and thyroid cancers. The majority of the sample (80.5%) had a disease course of less than 6 months and were actively receiving or had recently received surgical treatment.
Cite This Paper
Mingchun Deng, Zhenqi Lu, Anni Wang, Xiaoju Zhang, Jiajia Qiu, Yi Zhang, Yaqiong Chen, Jun Wang (2022). Chinese version of the Female Self-advocacy in Cancer survivorship scale. Asia-Pacific journal of Oncology nursing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apjon.2022.100080
References
34 references
- Siegel (2021). Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin, 71 (1), 7.
- Jefford (2020). Improving the care of adult cancer survivors. Asia-Pacific J Oncol Nursing, 7 (1), 2. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4103/apjon.apjon_42_19
- Nixon (2021). Rethinking the meaning of "wellness" for a person with cancer: a qualitative study to explore what elements constitute "wellness". Asia-Pacific J Oncol Nursing, 8 (4), 360. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4103/apjon.apjon-212
- Molassiotis (2017). Mapping unmet supportive care needs, quality-of-life perceptions and current symptoms in cancer survivors across the Asia-Pacific region: results from the International STEP Study. Ann Oncol, 28 (10), 2552. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx350
- The United Nations
- Magar (2015). Gender, health and the sustainable development goals. Bull World Health Organ, 93 (11), 743. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.15.165027
- Manandhar (2018). Gender, health and the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Bull World Health Organ, 96 (9), 644. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.18.211607
- Langer (2015). Women and Health: the key for sustainable development. Lancet, 386 (9999), 1165. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60497-4
- Hawkes (2019). Measurement and meaning: reporting sex in health research. Lancet, 393 (10171), 497. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30283-1
- Miaskowski (2004). Gender differences in pain, fatigue, and depression in patients with cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, 2004 (32), 139. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1093/jncimonographs/lgh024
- Keogh (2014). Gender differences in the nonverbal communication of pain: a new direction for sex, gender, and pain research?. Pain, 155 (10), 1927. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2014.06.024
- Samulowitz (2018). "Brave men" and "emotional women": a theory-guided literature review on gender bias in health care and gendered norms towards patients with chronic pain. Pain Res Manag, 2018 6358624. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6358624
- Hagan (2013). Self-advocacy and cancer: a concept analysis. J Adv Nurs, 69 (10), 2348. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12084
- Sung (2021). Global cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA A Cancer J Clin, 71 (3), 209.
- DeVellis (2012).
- Hagan (2018). The female Self-advocacy in Cancer survivorship scale: a validation study. J Adv Nurs, 74 (4), 976. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13498
- Sousa (2011). Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. J Eval Clin Pract, 17 (2), 268. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x
- Twombly (2004). What’s in a name: who is a cancer survivor?. J Natl Cancer Inst, 96 (19), 1414. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/96.19.1414
- Xiao (1994). The theoretical basis and research application of social support rating scale. J Clin Psychiatr, (2), 98.
- Cheung (1999). Assessment of optimistic self-beliefs: further validation of the Chinese version of the General Self-Efficacy Scale. Psychol Rep, 85 (3 Pt 2), 1221. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1999.85.3f.1221
- Wang (2001). Reliability and validity of general self-efficacy scale. Chinese J Appl Psychol, (1), 37.
- Brislin (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross Cult Psychol, 1 (3), 185. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
- Maneesriwongul (2004). Instrument translation process: a methods review. J Adv Nurs, 48 (2), 175. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03185.x
- Willis (2011). Cross-cultural cognitive interviewing: seeking comparability and enhancing understanding. Field Methods, 23 (4), 331. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X11416092
- Miller (2014).
- de Vet (2011).
- Polit (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Res Nurs Health, 30 (4), 459. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199
- Gaskin (2014). On exploratory factor analysis: a review of recent evidence, an assessment of current practice, and recommendations for future use. Int J Nurs Stud, 51 (3), 511. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2013.10.005
- Horn (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30 (2), 179. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447
- Lim (2019). Determining the number of factors using parallel analysis and its recent variants. Psychol Methods, 24 (4), 452. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000230
- Silverstein (1990). Update on the parallel analysis criterion for determining the number of principal components. Psychol Rep, 67 (2), 511. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1990.67.2.511
- Silverstein (1987). Note on the parallel analysis criterion for determining the number of common factors or principal components. Psychol Rep, 61 (2), 351. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1987.61.2.351
- Koo (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med, 15 (2), 155.
- Mukaka (2012). Statistics corner: a guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi Med J, 24 (3), 69.
Cite this article
Mohammed looti (2026). Chinese version of the Female Self-Advocacy in Cancer Survivorship scale. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Retrieved from https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/chinese-version-of-the-female-self-advocacy-in-cancer-survivorship-scale/
Mohammed looti. "Chinese version of the Female Self-Advocacy in Cancer Survivorship scale." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 14 Aug. 2026, https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/chinese-version-of-the-female-self-advocacy-in-cancer-survivorship-scale/.
Mohammed looti. "Chinese version of the Female Self-Advocacy in Cancer Survivorship scale." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 2026. https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/chinese-version-of-the-female-self-advocacy-in-cancer-survivorship-scale/.
Mohammed looti (2026) 'Chinese version of the Female Self-Advocacy in Cancer Survivorship scale', PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Available at: https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/chinese-version-of-the-female-self-advocacy-in-cancer-survivorship-scale/.
[1] Mohammed looti, "Chinese version of the Female Self-Advocacy in Cancer Survivorship scale," PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, vol. X, no. Y, ص Z-Z, August, 2026.
Mohammed looti. Chinese version of the Female Self-Advocacy in Cancer Survivorship scale. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. 2026;vol(issue):pages.