Premium
Parent Caring Response Scoring System: development and psychometric evaluation in the context of childhood cancer‐related port starts
Author(s) -
Bai Jinbing,
Swanson Kristen,
Harper Felicity W.K.,
Penner Louis A.,
Santacroce Sheila J.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
scandinavian journal of caring sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.678
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1471-6712
pISSN - 0283-9318
DOI - 10.1111/scs.12504
Subject(s) - observational study , distress , psychology , construct validity , kappa , nonverbal communication , coding (social sciences) , context (archaeology) , wilcoxon signed rank test , developmental psychology , clinical psychology , psychometrics , medicine , statistics , mathematics , paleontology , pedagogy , geometry , pathology , curriculum , biology
Rationale Multiple observational coding systems have been developed and validated to assess parent–child interactions during painful procedures. Most of these coding systems are neither theory‐based nor do they well represent parent nonverbal behaviours. Aims Develop the Parent Caring Response Scoring System (P‐CaRe SS ) based on Swanson's Theory of Caring and test its psychometric properties in children in cancer port starts. Methods A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding was used to formulate the preliminary observational codes for the P‐CaRe SS . Twenty‐nine children, each with one video‐recording of port start available, were selected from the parent study (R01 CA 138981) to refine the P‐CaRe SS , train coders and test inter‐rater reliability. Videos of another 43 children were used to evaluate the construct validity of P‐CaRe SS . Per cent agreement and Cohen's kappa were used to present the inter‐rater reliability. Spearman rank‐order correlations were used to report the construct validity. Results The 18‐item P‐CaRe SS includes three types of parent behaviours: verbal, nonverbal and emotional behaviours. These parent interaction behaviours comprise five caring domains – knowing, being with, doing for, enabling, and maintaining belief – and one noncaring domain. On average the per cent agreement was 0.82 for the P‐CaRe SS overall, with average per cent agreements above 0.80 for both verbal and nonverbal behaviours. Kappa coefficient was 0.81 for the emotional behaviour. The behavioural codes in the P‐CaRe SS showed significant correlations with independent ratings of parent distress, child distress and child cooperation. Conclusions The P‐CaRe SS is a promising tool that can be used to evaluate parent verbal, nonverbal and emotional behaviours during cancer‐related port starts. This observational tool can be used to guide the development of nursing interventions to help parents caring for their child during cancer procedures.