Conceptualisation and Measurement of Resilience of Adults With Cancer: An Umbrella Review.
Dan Luo, Kim Foster, Kate White
PMID 39812117WHAT IT FOUND
Resilience in adults with cancer was defined differently across reviews, but four parts appeared: personal resources, social support, coping, and recovering mental health.
Most resilience questionnaires measured only some of these.
Key findings
01Resilience in adults with cancer was defined inconsistently, but four common components emerged: available individual resources, access to social resources, adaptive coping ability, and ability to regain mental health and well-being.
02Most tools measured only partial features, but the original and Chinese 25-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale and the Bharathiar University Resilience Scale covered all four components.
03Fifty per cent of the tools assessed access to social resources and adaptive coping ability, while less than 40% assessed the ability to regain mental health and well-being.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only English-language reviews were included, and most (93%) of the included reviews searched only English-language databases. Most primary studies were conducted in North America, so the resilience components may fit Western contexts less well than other cultures. Less than one-fourth of the included reviews focused on a single cancer type, so differences by cancer type were not clear. The review did not examine how the four components relate to one another. Most resilience tools were developed for the general population, and older terms may not match current resilience theory.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the recommendation for the 25-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale as evidence that it improves resilience in adults with cancer. This review analysed definitions and measurement coverage, not patient outcomes or intervention effects.