Method for assessing return-to-work support for cancer survivors

Abstract

This invention discloses an assessment method for supporting cancer survivors returning to the workplace, comprising the following steps: Assessment system construction: Based on Roy's adaptation model and social support theory, a draft assessment system is formed; Reliability and validity testing: Items are screened using the critical ratio method and correlation coefficient method to ensure the discriminative and representative nature of the assessment system items; Reliability testing of the assessment system is conducted. This invention uses Roy's adaptation model and social support theory as a framework to ensure that the construction of the assessment system dimensions and the design of the items have a solid theoretical foundation. Through rigorous qualitative research, multiple rounds of Delphi expert consultations, and cognitive interviews, the content of the assessment system is ensured to be consistent with the Chinese workplace culture and the actual experiences of cancer survivors, exhibiting high content validity and cultural adaptability.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of medical assessment tools technology, and more specifically, relates to an assessment method for supporting cancer survivors to return to work. Background Technology

[0002] According to GLOBOCAN 2022 statistics, there were 19.97 million new cancer cases worldwide. Approximately 40% of cancer survivors were of working age at diagnosis and were forced to leave their jobs due to treatment. Return to work (RTW) has become a core indicator for measuring the quality of recovery for working-age cancer survivors. Social support theory points out that workplace support (flexible leadership arrangements, colleague collaboration, financial security, etc.) directly affects the psychological adaptation and career continuity of cancer survivors. Existing research focuses primarily on family and medical support, neglecting the crucial role of the workplace as a support system. Strengthening workplace support has a positive impact on cancer survivors' return to work. Currently, there are relevant tools, such as the Cancer and Work Scale (CAWSE) for assessing RTW capabilities and employment sustainability, the Return to Work Readiness Scale, and the Cancer Survivor Return to Work Adaptability Scale, etc. Although they have multiple dimensions, they are difficult to assess the specific effects of workplace support. Summary of the Invention

[0003] To address the aforementioned issues, this invention proposes an assessment method for supporting cancer survivors returning to work. This method can accurately assess the specific needs of cancer survivors in terms of work arrangements, emotional support, and financial subsidies upon returning to work. It provides an effective tool for medical institutions and enterprises to develop intervention measures for cancer survivors returning to work and offers a reference for relevant government departments to improve occupational protection systems such as sick leave, insurance, and anti-discrimination.

[0004] To address at least one of the aforementioned technical problems, according to one aspect of the present invention, an assessment method for supporting cancer survivors returning to work is provided, comprising the following steps: Assessment system construction: Based on Roy's adaptation model and social support theory, a draft assessment system is formed;

[0005] Reliability and validity testing: The critical ratio method and correlation coefficient method were used to screen items to ensure the discrimination and representativeness of the evaluation system items; the reliability of the evaluation system was tested.

[0006] Furthermore, in the construction of the evaluation system, the evaluation system includes evaluation dimensions and evaluation indicators;

[0007] The assessment dimensions include: work arrangements, emotional support, and financial subsidies.

[0008] Furthermore, the work arrangement includes: reasonable working hours, appropriate work intensity, and work flexibility;

[0009] The emotional support includes: support from colleagues and support from superiors;

[0010] The economic subsidies include: salary level and welfare benefits.

[0011] Furthermore, the reliability and validity testing employs one or more of the following methods: internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability, and split-half reliability.

[0012] Furthermore, the reliability and validity testing uses one or more of the methods of content validity and construct validity.

[0013] According to another aspect of the present invention, a computer-readable storage medium is provided having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps in the assessment method for supporting cancer survivors to return to work according to the present invention.

[0014] According to another aspect of the present invention, a computer device is provided, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor executes the program to implement the steps of the assessment method for supporting cancer survivors to return to work according to the present invention.

[0015] Compared with existing technologies, the beneficial effects of the above-described method of the present invention are as follows:

[0016] (1) This invention is the first to develop a systematic assessment tool specifically for the key link of “support for cancer survivors to return to work”. It focuses on the specific context of the workplace and the core support subject of the unit (employer / colleague), making up for the lack of assessment tools in this sub-field. The research perspective is more targeted and has practical guiding significance.

[0017] (2) This invention uses Roy's adaptation model and social support theory as a framework to ensure that the construction of the assessment system dimensions and the design of the items have a solid theoretical support. Through rigorous qualitative research, multiple rounds of Delphi expert consultation and cognitive interviews, it ensures that the content of the assessment system is in line with the Chinese workplace culture background and the actual experience of cancer survivors, and has high content validity and cultural adaptability.

[0018] (3) After large-sample empirical testing, this assessment system has shown excellent reliability and validity, and can reliably and stably measure the support level for cancer survivors to return to work.

[0019] (4) This assessment system can help employers understand their current status and shortcomings in supporting employees who survive cancer, thereby optimizing work arrangements, improving emotional care mechanisms and economic subsidy policies, building a more inclusive and supportive workplace environment, and fulfilling social responsibilities.

[0020] (5) This assessment system can provide empirical data support for government and public policy-making departments, provide scientific reference for improving the sick leave system, labor protection, anti-employment discrimination and social security policies related to cancer survivors, and promote the formulation and implementation of "cancer-friendly" employment policies.

[0021] (6) The promotion and application of this invention will help build a bridge between multiple disciplines such as clinical medicine, rehabilitation science, human resource management, and social security policy, so as to jointly focus on and improve the occupational life quality of cancer survivors. By improving the level of support from employers, it can directly promote the successful and sustainable return to work of cancer survivors, which not only improves their mental health and quality of life, but also reduces the loss of social productivity, and has significant social and economic benefits. Attached Figure Description

[0022] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the accompanying drawings of the embodiments will be briefly described below. Obviously, the drawings described below only relate to some embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention.

[0023] Figure 1 This is a preferred embodiment of the lithotripsy map of a cancer survivor return-to-work support assessment system.

[0024] Figure 2 This is a diagram of a confirmatory factor analysis model for a preferred embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0025] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some, not all, of the embodiments of the present invention.

[0026] Unless otherwise defined, the technical or scientific terms used herein shall have the ordinary meaning as understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains.

[0027] like Figure 1-2 As shown, this invention provides an assessment method for supporting cancer survivors returning to work, comprising the following steps:

[0028] Assessment System Construction: Based on Roy's adaptation model and social support theory, a draft assessment system was developed through literature review, qualitative research, Delphi expert consultation, and cognitive interviews. The system comprises a standardized model with 20 assessment indicators across three primary assessment dimensions: work arrangement, emotional support, and financial subsidies. The work arrangement dimension covers the reasonableness of working hours, the appropriateness of work intensity, and work flexibility; the emotional support dimension includes peer support and superior support; and the financial subsidies dimension involves salary levels and benefits. Through these indicators, the system comprehensively assesses the workplace support situation faced by cancer survivors, providing them with precise support and assistance.

[0029] Reliability and validity testing: Items were screened using the critical ratio method and correlation coefficient method to ensure the discrimination and representativeness of the assessment system items; internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability, and split-half reliability were used to test the reliability of the assessment system to ensure the stability and reliability of the assessment results; content validity and construct validity were used to test the validity of the assessment system to verify whether it can accurately assess the actual situation of institutional support for cancer survivors. Through rigorous reliability and validity testing, the assessment system is guaranteed to have high scientific validity and practicality, providing a solid basis for subsequent applications.

[0030] Example 1: Core Components and Evaluation Model of the Evaluation System

[0031] This embodiment details the core components of the evaluation system of the present invention and the evaluation model constructed thereon.

[0032] System Evaluation Model: This evaluation system is based on a standardized model comprising three primary evaluation dimensions and a total of 20 evaluation indicators. The three core dimensions are: job placement support, emotional support, and economic support. This model is grounded in Roy's adaptation model and social support theory, ensuring that the system can comprehensively and structurally measure the key unit support required by cancer survivors during their return to work.

[0033] Example of evaluation indicator content:

[0034] Work Arrangement Support Dimension: This dimension assesses the level of job adjustment provided by the employer to cancer survivors. Indicators included in the system include, for example, "During my illness, my employer granted me sufficient sick leave," and "After returning to work, my supervisor appropriately reduced my workload based on my health condition."

[0035] Emotional Support Dimension: This dimension assesses the level of psychological support from leaders and colleagues. Indicators included in the system include, for example, "After returning to work, my leaders and colleagues responded positively and provided support for my needs," and "After returning to work, if I was unable to complete my work on time due to health reasons, my leaders and colleagues were understanding and tolerant."

[0036] Economic Subsidy Support Dimension: This dimension assesses the level of economic security provided by the employer. Indicators included in the system include, for example, "Does the employer have corresponding institutional guarantees regarding the salary and benefits of employees with cancer?" and "During sick leave, I still enjoy the employer's basic salary and benefits."

[0037] Quantitative assessment method: The system uses a 5-point Likert scale to quantify each assessment indicator. For each indicator, five levels are set from "completely disagree" (1 point) to "completely agree" (5 points), which are selected by cancer survivors based on their own true perception.

[0038] Data Analysis and Output: The system automatically calculates the total score and scores for each dimension. The system generates a visual assessment report that intuitively displays the overall support level and performance across each dimension. A higher score indicates a higher perceived level of support for cancer survivors. This output can be used to identify areas of strength and areas for improvement.

[0039] Example 2: Implementation process and application methods of the evaluation system

[0040] This embodiment details the typical implementation process of this evaluation system and its application in different scenarios.

[0041] Target Population and Prerequisites: The standard assessment targets for this system are: ① Pathologically confirmed malignant tumors (regardless of organ or type); ② Complete remission (CR), partial remission (PR), or stable disease (SD) as assessed by a specialist physician after treatment; ③ Age 18-60 years, with good verbal expression and comprehension abilities; ④ Knowledge of their condition; ⑤ Willingness to participate; ⑥ Prior to the illness, they were employed at their current workplace; those with visual or auditory impairments, difficulties in verbal comprehension / expression, a history of mental illness, or who have experienced a major traumatic event within the past six months are excluded. Electronic informed consent from the assessed individuals must be obtained through the system interface before implementation.

[0042] Standard implementation process:

[0043] Access and Guidance: Cancer survivors access the assessment system via devices such as computers, tablets, and mobile phones. The system homepage displays the purpose of the assessment, the confidentiality agreement, and the completion guidelines.

[0044] Online assessment: Cancer survivors read through 20 assessment indicators and select the corresponding level based on their actual experience after returning to work. The system interface is clearly designed, and the estimated completion time is 5-8 minutes.

[0045] Data Submission and Processing: After cancer survivors submit their data, the system automatically performs data verification (such as checking for missing items) and immediately calls the background analysis algorithm to calculate the score.

[0046] Report generation: The system can automatically generate an individual assessment report summary for the assessed person or their authorized professional (such as a rehabilitation therapist) to view.

[0047] Multi-scenario application modes:

[0048] Clinical rehabilitation management scenario: Rehabilitation physicians or nurses can integrate this system into the cancer survivor follow-up management platform. Through regular assessments, changes in perceived workplace support among cancer survivors can be dynamically tracked, providing precise data support for developing personalized vocational rehabilitation intervention plans and facilitating healthcare-enterprise communication.

[0049] Human resource optimization scenarios for enterprises and institutions: Corporate HR departments can use this system as an anonymous internal survey tool to conduct regular or irregular assessments of relevant employee groups. Through aggregated analysis, the system can diagnose the organization's overall performance and shortcomings in supporting returning employees, thereby enabling targeted optimization of management systems, management training, and improvement of welfare policies to build an inclusive workplace.

[0050] Macroeconomic policy research and evaluation scenarios: Government research institutions, public health departments, or industry associations can authorize the use of this system to conduct large-scale cross-regional and cross-industry sampling surveys. By collecting standardized data, the system analyzes the differences in support levels among different groups, providing a scientific and quantitative basis for evaluating the effectiveness of existing policies and formulating or revising labor protection, anti-discrimination, and related social welfare policies.

[0051] Example 3: Verification of the Measurement Properties of the Evaluation System

[0052] This embodiment uses empirical data to illustrate the reliability and effectiveness of this evaluation system as a standardized measurement tool. See Table 1.

[0053] Reliability verification results:

[0054] Internal consistency reliability: The overall Cronbach's α coefficient for the system is 0.934. The Cronbach's α coefficients for each dimension are as follows: job arrangement support 0.921, affective support 0.892, and economic subsidy support 0.893. These data indicate that the consistency of the various indicators within the system in measuring the same concept is extremely high.

[0055] Test-retest reliability: The system was used to reassess 30 participants two weeks apart, and the consistency of the two results was calculated. The overall test-retest reliability (Cronbach's α) was 0.947, and the test-retest reliability of each dimension ranged from 0.896 to 0.951, demonstrating that the system's measurement results remain stable over time and have strong reliability.

[0056] Split-half reliability: Using the odd-even split-half test, the calculated Spearman-Brown correction coefficient was 0.826, further supporting the reliability of the system.

[0057] Validity verification results:

[0058] Content validity: Six experts in relevant fields (covering medicine, management, and sociology) were invited to assess the relevance of the evaluation indicators and dimensions of this system. The overall content validity index (S-CVI) of the system was 0.85, and the content validity index (I-CVI) of all items ranged from 0.83 to 1.00, indicating that the system content can adequately represent the concept of "unit support" to be measured.

[0059] Construct validity:

[0060] Exploratory factor analysis (EFA): The sampling suitability measure KMO was 0.924, and Bartlett's test of sphericity was significant (χ²=2707.547, p<0.001), indicating suitability for factor analysis. Principal component analysis was used to extract three common factors with eigenvalues ​​greater than 1, cumulatively explaining 64.662% of the variance. After rotation, the factor loadings of all 20 indicators on their theoretically pre-defined dimensions were all above 0.6, clearly clustering into the three factors of "work arrangement," "emotional support," and "economic subsidies," perfectly matching the system design model.

[0061] Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed excellent model fit: χ² / df = 1.302 (<3), RMSEA = 0.037 (<0.05), CFI = 0.982, TLI = 0.980, IFI = 0.982. All indicators met or far exceeded the statistical recommendations, strongly confirming that the three-factor structure model of this evaluation system is reasonable and effective.

[0062] Table 1. Component matrix after factor molecule rotation (n=218)

[0063]

[0064] Example 4:

[0065] The computer-readable storage medium of this embodiment stores a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the steps in the assessment method for supporting cancer survivors to return to work in Embodiment 1.

[0066] The computer-readable storage medium in this embodiment can be an internal storage unit of the terminal, such as the terminal's hard disk or memory; the computer-readable storage medium in this embodiment can also be an external storage device of the terminal, such as a plug-in hard disk, smart memory card, secure digital card, flash memory card, etc. equipped on the terminal; furthermore, the computer-readable storage medium can include both the terminal's internal storage unit and external storage devices.

[0067] The computer-readable storage medium of this embodiment is used to store computer programs and other programs and data required by the terminal. The computer-readable storage medium can also be used to temporarily store data that has been output or will be output.

[0068] Example 5:

[0069] The computer device of this embodiment includes a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor. When the processor executes the program, it implements the steps in the assessment method for supporting cancer survivors to return to work in Embodiment 1.

[0070] In this embodiment, the processor can be a central processing unit, or other general-purpose processors, digital signal processors, application-specific integrated circuits, off-the-shelf programmable gate arrays or other programmable logic devices, discrete gate or transistor logic devices, discrete hardware components, etc. The general-purpose processor can be a microprocessor or any conventional processor, etc. The memory can include read-only memory and random access memory, and provides instructions and data to the processor. A portion of the memory can also include non-volatile random access memory. For example, the memory can also store device type information.

[0071] Those skilled in the art will understand that the content disclosed in the embodiments can be provided as a method, system, or computer program product. Therefore, this solution can take the form of a hardware embodiment, a software embodiment, or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects. Furthermore, this solution can take the form of a computer program product implemented on one or more computer-usable storage media (including but not limited to disk storage and optical storage) containing computer-usable program code.

[0072] This solution is described with reference to flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams of methods and computer program products according to embodiments of this solution. It should be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions can be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, special-purpose computer, embedded processor, or other programmable data processing device to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing device, generate instructions for implementing the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams. Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A device that provides the functions specified in one or more boxes.

[0073] These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable storage medium that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing device to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable storage medium produce an article of manufacture including instruction means, which are implemented in a process Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The function specified in one or more boxes.

[0074] These computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing equipment to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or other programmable equipment to produce a computer-implemented process, thereby providing instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable equipment for implementing the process. Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The steps of the function specified in one or more boxes.

[0075] Those skilled in the art will understand that all or part of the processes in the above embodiments can be implemented by a computer program instructing related hardware. The program can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, and when executed, it can include the processes of the embodiments of the above methods. The storage medium can be a magnetic disk, optical disk, read-only memory (ROM), or random access memory (RAM), etc.

[0076] The examples described herein are merely preferred embodiments of the invention and are not intended to limit the concept and scope of the invention. Any modifications and improvements made by those skilled in the art to the technical solutions of the invention without departing from the design concept of the invention should fall within the protection scope of the invention.

[0077] The foregoing has shown and described the basic principles, main features, and advantages of the present invention. Those skilled in the art should understand that the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments described above. The specific embodiments and descriptions in the specification are merely for further illustrating the principles of the invention. Various changes and modifications can be made to the present invention without departing from its spirit and scope, and all such changes and modifications fall within the scope of the present invention as claimed. The scope of protection of the present invention is defined by the claims and their equivalents.

Claims

1. An assessment method for supporting cancer survivors' return to work, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Assessment System Construction: Based on Roy's adaptation model and social support theory, an initial draft of the assessment system was developed; Reliability and validity testing: The critical ratio method and correlation coefficient method were used to screen items to ensure the discrimination and representativeness of the evaluation system items; The reliability of the evaluation system was tested.

2. The method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, In the construction of the evaluation system, the evaluation system includes evaluation dimensions and evaluation indicators; The assessment dimensions include: work arrangements, emotional support, and financial subsidies.

3. The method as described in claim 2, characterized in that, The work arrangement includes: reasonable working hours, appropriate work intensity, and work flexibility; The emotional support includes: support from colleagues and support from superiors; The economic subsidies include: salary level and welfare benefits.

4. The method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The reliability and validity testing employs one or more of the following methods: internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability, and split-half reliability.

5. The method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The reliability and validity testing uses one or more of the methods of content validity and construct validity.

6. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that: When executed by the processor, the program implements the steps in the assessment method for supporting cancer survivors to return to work as described in any one of claims 1 to 5.

7. A computer device, comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, characterized in that, When the processor executes the program, it implements the steps in the assessment method for supporting cancer survivors to return to work as described in any one of claims 1 to 5.

Images