↓ Skip to main content

Psychometric evaluation of the Persian version of the Lymphedema Life Impact Scale (LLIS, version 1) in breast cancer patients

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Psychometric evaluation of the Persian version of the Lymphedema Life Impact Scale (LLIS, version 1) in breast cancer patients
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12955-018-0958-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shahpar Haghighat, Ali Montazeri, Farid Zayeri, Mandana Ebrahimi, Jan Weiss

Abstract

Despite the high prevalence of lymphedema in Iranian breast cancer patients, there is no valid instrument for measuring quality of life in this population. The aim of this study was to assess reliability and validity of the Persian version of Lymphedema Life Impact Scale (LLIS) in breast cancer patients. Forward-backward procedure was applied to translate The LLIS from English into Persian. The LLIS is an 18-item measure of physical, psychosocial, and functional impairments caused by lymphedema. Experts and patients assessed content and face validity, respectively. Discriminant validity was evaluated by comparing breast cancer patients with and without lymphedema. Convergent validity was assessed by comparing LLIS score with SF-36 (functional component) and the EORTC-QLQ-C30 (functional component). The construct validity also was evaluated using confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses. Internal consistency was evaluated by Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Stability was assessed by test-retest analysis over a one-week interval in 13 patients. In all 446 breast cancer patients were entered into the study. The content and face validity of Persian version of LLIS were acceptable and minor corrections were applied in final version. The questionnaire differentiated well in patients' with and without lymphedema and not lending support to its discriminant validity. Confirmatory factor analysis showed a good fit for the data. Cronbach's alpha coefficient in physical, psychosocial and functional subscales were 0.873, 0.854 and 0.884 respectively. Intra-class correlation coefficient of total score of the LLIS was 0.96. The findings of this study suggest a first indication that reliability and validity of the Persian version of LLIS in patients with breast cancer induced lymphedema was good. Application of this instrument for identifying problems of patients with upper extremity lymphedema may be helpful in designing interventions to improve quality of life.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Librarian 1 3%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 18 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Sports and Recreations 3 8%
Unspecified 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 24 60%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2018.
All research outputs
#2,490,439
of 15,442,255 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#235
of 1,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,891
of 277,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,442,255 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,660 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,502 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them