Development and validation of an instrument to measure the impact of genetic testing on self-concept in Lynch syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A positive genetic test result may impact on a person's self-concept and affect quality of life. The purpose of the study was to develop a self-concept scale to measure such impact for individuals carrying mutations for a heritable colorectal cancer Lynch syndrome (LS). Two distinct phases were involved: Phase 1 generated specific colorectal self-concept candidate scale items from interviews with eight LS carriers and five genetic counselors, which were added to a previously developed self-concept scale for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, Phase II had 115 LS carriers complete the candidate scale and a battery of validating measures. A 20-item scale was developed with two dimensions identified through factor analysis: stigma/vulnerability and bowel symptom-related anxiety. The scale showed excellent reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.93), good convergent validity by a high correlation with impact of event scale (r(102) = 0.55, p < 0.001) and Rosenberg self-esteem scale (r(108) = -0.59, p < 0.001), and a low correlation with the Fear questionnaire (r(108) = 0.37, p < 0.001). The scale's performance was stable across participant characteristics. This new scale for measuring self-concept has potential to be used as a clinical tool and as a measure for future studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".