Developing a Global Cancer Stigma Index

Published In: SAGE Open, v. 4, no. 3, July/Sep. 2014, p. 1-9

Posted on RAND.org on July 01, 2014

by Maria Orlando Edelen, Anita Chandra, Brian D. Stucky, Rebekkah Schear, Claire Neal, Ruth Rechis

Read More

Access further information on this document at sgo.sagepub.com

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Despite increasing recognition about the stigma associated with cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment-seeking behaviors, there has been relatively little attention paid to how to assess and intervene to reduce that stigma. An index to measure cancer stigma could empower health program developers and policymakers by identifying the key areas in which a population could benefit from education to change perceptions and address misinformation. The index also could be used to rank countries and communities based on their level of cancer stigma to assess where interventions are needed. We used structured literature review and expert review to generate a cancer stigma item pool. The item pool was subject to cognitive interviews for cultural appropriateness and comprehension; and data from initial pilot testing were used to reduce the pool of items for translation and field testing. The field test was conducted using a web-based survey in four samples representing two regions and three languages—English and Arabic speakers in Jordan and Egypt, and English and Mandarin Chinese speakers in China. Factor analyses and item response theory were applied to finalize the index. The analyses resulted in a 12-item cancer stigma index (CSI) that was reliable across all four samples. The CSI scores were highly correlated with a general illness stigma scale, and operated as expected noting higher cancer stigma among men and those with lower income. The CSI can be used to inform initial cancer education efforts, identifying overall stigma levels in a country or community and particular issue areas requiring intervention.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.