Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Supportive Care in Cancer
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer 3/2017

Open Access 01-03-2017 | Original Article

Development and validation of an abbreviated version of the Trust in Oncologist Scale—the Trust in Oncologist Scale–short form (TiOS-SF)

Authors: Marij A. Hillen, Rosa-May Postma, Mathilde G. E. Verdam, Ellen M. A. Smets

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 3/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The original 18-item, four-dimensional Trust in Oncologist Scale assesses cancer patients’ trust in their oncologist. The current aim was to develop and validate a short form version of the scale to enable more efficient assessment of cancer patients’ trust.

Methods

Existing validation data of the full-length Trust in Oncologist Scale were used to create a short form of the Trust in Oncologist Scale. The resulting short form was validated in a new sample of cancer patients (n = 92). Socio-demographics, medical characteristics, trust in the oncologist, satisfaction with communication, trust in healthcare, willingness to recommend the oncologist to others and to contact the oncologist in case of questions were assessed. Internal consistency, reliability, convergent and structural validity were tested.

Results

The five-item Trust in Oncologist Scale Short Form was created by selecting the statistically best performing item from each dimension of the original scale, to ensure content validity. Mean trust in the oncologist was high in the validation sample (response rate 86%, M = 4.30, SD = 0.98). Exploratory factor analyses supported one-dimensionality of the short form. Internal consistency was high, and temporal stability was moderate. Initial convergent validity was suggested by moderate correlations between trust scores with associated constructs.

Conclusions

The Trust in Oncologist Scale Short Form appears to efficiently, reliably and validly measures cancer patients’ trust in their oncologist. It may be used in research and as a quality indicator in clinical practice. More thorough validation of the scale is recommended to confirm this initial evidence of its validity.
Literature
1.
Mechanic D, Meyer S (2000) Concepts of trust among patients with serious illness. Soc Sci Med 51(5):657–668CrossRefPubMed
2.
Hall MA, Dugan E, Zheng BY, Mishra AK (2001) Trust in physicians and medical institutions: what is it, can it be measured, and does it matter? Milbank Q 79(4):613–639CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Hillen MA, Onderwater AT, Van Zwieten MCB, de Haes JC, Smets EM (2012) Disentangling cancer patients’ trust in their oncologist: a qualitative study. Psychooncology 21(4):392–399CrossRefPubMed
4.
Hall MA, Zheng BY, Dugan E, Camacho F, Kidd KE, Mishra A, Balkrishnan R (2002) Measuring patients’ trust in their primary care providers. Med Care Res Rev 59(3):293–318CrossRefPubMed
5.
Balkrishnan R, Dugan E, Camacho FT, Hall MA (2003) Trust and satisfaction with physicians, insurers, and the medical profession. Med Care 41(9):1058–1064CrossRefPubMed
6.
Trachtenberg F, Dugan E, Hall MA (2005) How patients’ trust relates to their involvement in medical care. J Fam Pract 54(4):344–352PubMed
7.
Thom DH, Ribisl KM, Stewart AL, Luke DA (1999) Further validation and reliability testing of the Trust in Physician Scale. Med Care 37(5):510–517CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
10.
Anderson AA, Dedrick FD (1990) Development of the Trust in Physician Scale: a measure to assess interpersonal trust in patient–physician relationships. Psychol Rep 67(3f):1091–1100CrossRefPubMed
11.
Hillen MA, Butow PN, Tattersall MHN, Hruby G, Boyle FM, Vardy J, Kallimanis-King BL, de Haes JCJM, Smets EMA (2013) Validation of the English version of the Trust in Oncologist Scale (TiOS). Patient Educ Couns 91(1):25–28CrossRefPubMed
12.
Hillen MA, Koning CCE, Wilmink JW, Klinkenbijl JHG, Eddes EH, Kallimanis-King BL, de Haes JCJM, Smets EMA (2012) Assessing cancer patients’ trust in their oncologist: development and validation of the Trust in Oncologist Scale (TiOS). Support Care Cancer 20(8):1787–1795. doi:10.​1007/​s00520-011-1276-8 CrossRefPubMed
13.
Hillen MA, De Haes HCJM, Stalpers LJA, Klinkenbijl JHG, Eddes EH, Verdam MGE, Smets EMA (2014) How attachment style and locus of control influence patients’ trust in their oncologist. J Psychosom Res 76(3):221–226CrossRefPubMed
14.
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2010) The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 63(7):737–745CrossRefPubMed
15.
Hillen MA, De Haes HCJM, Stalpers LJA, Klinkenbijl JHG, Eddes EH, Butow PN, van der Vloodt J, van Laarhoven HWM, Smets EMA (2014) How can communication by oncologists enhance patients’ trust? An experimental study. Ann Oncol 25(4):896–901CrossRefPubMed
16.
Hillen MA, de Haes JCJM, van Tienhoven G, Bijker N, van Laarhoven HWM, Vermeulen DM, Smets EMA (2015) All eyes on the patient—the influence of oncologists’ nonverbal communication on breast cancer patients’ trust. Breast Cancer Res Tr 153(1):161–171. doi:10.​1007/​s10549-015-3486-0 CrossRef
17.
Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ
18.
Nunnally JC (1978) An overview of psychological measurement. In: Clinical diagnosis of mental disorders. Springer, p 97–146
19.
Do YK, Carpenter WR, Spain P, Clark JA, Hamilton RJ, Galanko JA, Jackman A, Talcott JA, Godley PA (2010) Race, healthcare access and physician trust among prostate cancer patients. Cancer Cause Control 21:31–40CrossRef
20.
Kowalski C, Nitzsche A, Scheibler F, Steffen P, Albert U, Pfaff H (2009) Breast cancer patients’ trust in physicians: the impact of patients’ perception of physicians’ communication behaviors and hospital organizational climate. Pat Educ Couns
21.
Seetharamu N, Iqbal U, Weiner JS (2007) Determinants of trust in the patient–oncologist relationship. Palliat Support Care 5(4):405–409CrossRefPubMed
22.
O’Malley AS, Sheppard VB, Schwartz M, Mandelblatt J (2004) The role of trust in use of preventive services among low-income African–American women. Prev Med 38(6):777–785CrossRefPubMed
23.
Kraetschmer N, Sharpe N, Urowitz S, Deber RB (2004) How does trust affect patient preferences for participation in decision making? Health Expect 7(4):317–326CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Gordon HS, Street RL Jr, Sharf BF, Kelly PA, Souchek J (2006) Racial differences in trust and lung cancer patients’ perceptions of physician communication. J Clin Oncol 24(6):904–909CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Development and validation of an abbreviated version of the Trust in Oncologist Scale—the Trust in Oncologist Scale–short form (TiOS-SF)
Authors
Marij A. Hillen
Rosa-May Postma
Mathilde G. E. Verdam
Ellen M. A. Smets
Publication date
01-03-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 3/2017
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-016-3473-y

Other articles of this Issue 3/2017

Supportive Care in Cancer 3/2017 Go to the issue

Original Article

Use of iron sucrose and red blood cell transfusions in anaemic cancer patients in France (OncoFer study)

Original Article

The role of clinical pharmacists in treatment adherence: fast impact in suppression of chronic myeloid leukemia development and symptoms

Original Article

Communication preferences of pediatric cancer patients: talking about prognosis and their future life

Original Article

Identification of the predictors of cognitive impairment in patients with cancer in palliative care: a prospective longitudinal analysis

Original Article

Effects of a multimodal rehabilitation programme on inflammation and oxidative stress in oesophageal cancer survivors: the ReStOre feasibility study

Original Article

Efficacy and safety of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during the first cycle of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in Korean patients with a broad range of tumor types
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits