Evaluation of the Japanese Version of the Cancer Survivors' Unmet Needs Scale

Hiroko Komatsu, Kaori Yagasaki, Yasunori Sato, Harue Arao, Sena Yamamoto, Tetsu Hayashida

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)


This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Japanese version of the Cancer Survivors' Unmet Needs (CaSUN-J) scale among cancer survivors in Japan. Methods: The CaSUN-J was developed using standardized translation methodology. Content validity was evaluated by a group of experts, and a pilot test was conducted with a convenience sample of 10 cancer patients. A total of 183 Japanese cancer survivors completed the CaSUN-J. The internal consistency of the scale was examined with Cronbach's . Construct validity was analyzed using correlations with the physical effects, quality of life (QoL), and age. To assess the factorial validity of the CaSUN-J, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed. Results: The CaSUN-J indicated good readability and high content validity for use as an assessment tool among Japanese cancer survivors. All Cronbach's coefficients were above the minimum acceptable criterion of ≥0.70. For construct validity, higher physical effect scores, as well as poorer QoL scores and younger patients, were significantly positively associated with higher levels of needs. CFA indicated that the five-factor structure of the CaSUN-J was a good fit to the data. Conclusions: The CaSUN-J can serve as a valid and reliable tool to evaluate unmet needs among Japanese cancer survivors.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)167-173
Number of pages7
JournalAsia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2020 Apr 1


  • Cancer survivors
  • Japanese
  • psychometric validation
  • supportive care
  • unmet needs

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Oncology(nursing)


Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation of the Japanese Version of the Cancer Survivors' Unmet Needs Scale'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this