Cross-cultural validation of the Korean version of the patient-centered survivorship care index (K-PC-SCI) among adult cancer survivors

Background The Patient-Centered Survivorship Care Index (PC-SCI) was developed from cancer survivors’ priorities for patient-centered survivorship care. This study translated and culturally adapted the PC-SCI for Korea and evaluated the measurement properties of the Korean version (K-PC-SCI) among adult cancer survivors. Methods This multicenter validation study recruited adult cancer survivors from three hospitals in South Korea using convenience sampling. Translation and adaptation included forward translation, expert review, back-translation, pilot testing with cognitive debriefing, and content-validity assessment. Of 220 distributed questionnaires, 198 were analyzed. Structural validity was evaluated using robust maximum-likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. The prespecified seven-factor simple-structure model was primary; original-study-informed and data-informed residual-covariance models were examined as sensitivity analyses. Reliability, convergent and discriminant evidence, ceiling effects, and relations with the Korean Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs scale (K-CaSUN) were also assessed. Results Thirty-four of 36 items were retained (S-CVI/Ave = 0.98). The prespecified seven-factor model showed moderate fit (robust CFI = 0.913, TLI = 0.904, RMSEA = 0.075, SRMR = 0.060). An original-study-informed sensitivity model improved fit (CFI = 0.923, TLI = 0.914, RMSEA = 0.071, SRMR = 0.055). A parsimonious data-informed model with four substantively interpretable within-factor residual covariances showed further improvement (CFI = 0.937, TLI = 0.930, RMSEA = 0.064, SRMR = 0.049) but requires independent replication. Standardized loadings ranged from 0.70 to 0.94, AVE from 0.64 to 0.81, and HTMT from 0.675 to 0.896. Subscale alpha ranged from 0.85 to 0.94 and omega from 0.86 to 0.94; total alpha was 0.98. Six items had ceiling proportions above 40%. K-PC-SCI scores showed little association with the K-CaSUN unmet-needs count (Spearman’s rho = 0.072, 95% BCa CI − 0.068 to 0.207, p = 0.313) and a small positive association with severity-weighted unmet-needs intensity (rho = 0.162, 95% BCa CI 0.023 to 0.292, p = 0.023). Conclusions The K-PC-SCI showed preliminary psychometric support for assessing survivors’ priorities for patient-centered survivorship care in Korea. The primary CFA showed moderate fit, while sensitivity analyses indicated residual local dependence and partial domain overlap. Further validation in independent, particularly post-treatment and community-based, samples is warranted.