OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the internal consistency and construct validity of a Korean version of the Caregiver Quality of Life Index-Cancer (CQOLC-K). METHODS: The CQOLC-K was administered to 270 caregivers, along with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). RESULTS: Internal consistency of the CQOLC-K (0.90) and all inter-scale correlations were significant in the expected direction (p < 0.001). Convergent validity was supported with moderate to strong correlations between the CQOLC-K and the mental component scores of the SF-36 (r = 0.39-0.58), and between the CQOLC-K and the two BDI scores (r = 0.50 and 0.60). Divergent validity was supported by weaker or negligible correlations between the CQOLC-K and the physical component scores of the SF-36 (r = 0.16-0.30). Contrasting groups validity showed that the CQOLC-K was able to distinguish clearly between patients differing in treatment history (p < 0.005), performance status (p < 0.005), care area (p < 0.005), and length of time after diagnosis (p < 0.005). CONCLUSION: These findings support the internal consistency reliability and construct validity of the Korean version of the CQOLC-K. The instrument can be used to measure quality of life in caregivers of cancer patients in clinical and epidemiological research.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the internal consistency and construct validity of a Korean version of the Caregiver Quality of Life Index-Cancer (CQOLC-K). METHODS: The CQOLC-K was administered to 270 caregivers, along with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). RESULTS: Internal consistency of the CQOLC-K (0.90) and all inter-scale correlations were significant in the expected direction (p < 0.001). Convergent validity was supported with moderate to strong correlations between the CQOLC-K and the mental component scores of the SF-36 (r = 0.39-0.58), and between the CQOLC-K and the two BDI scores (r = 0.50 and 0.60). Divergent validity was supported by weaker or negligible correlations between the CQOLC-K and the physical component scores of the SF-36 (r = 0.16-0.30). Contrasting groups validity showed that the CQOLC-K was able to distinguish clearly between patients differing in treatment history (p < 0.005), performance status (p < 0.005), care area (p < 0.005), and length of time after diagnosis (p < 0.005). CONCLUSION: These findings support the internal consistency reliability and construct validity of the Korean version of the CQOLC-K. The instrument can be used to measure quality of life in caregivers of cancerpatients in clinical and epidemiological research.
Authors: K E Covinsky; L Goldman; E F Cook; R Oye; N Desbiens; D Reding; W Fulkerson; A F Connors; J Lynn; R S Phillips Journal: JAMA Date: 1994-12-21 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Rathi Mahendran; Haikel A Lim; Joanne Chua; Chao Xu Peh; Siew Eng Lim; Ee Heok Kua Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-08-06 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Sang Min Park; Young Jin Kim; Samyong Kim; Jong Soo Choi; Ho-Yeong Lim; Youn Seon Choi; Young Seon Hong; Si-Young Kim; Dae Seog Heo; Ki Moon Kang; Hyun Sik Jeong; Chang Geol Lee; Do Ho Moon; Jin-Young Choi; In Sik Kong; Young Ho Yun Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2009-05-31 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Boyoung Park; So Young Kim; Ji-Yeon Shin; Robert W Sanson-Fisher; Dong Wook Shin; Juhee Cho; Jong-Hyock Park Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-06-01 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Yong Joo Lee; Jung Eun Kim; Youn Seon Choi; In Cheol Hwang; Sun Wook Hwang; Young Sung Kim; Hyo Min Kim; Hong Yup Ahn; So Jin Kim Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-02-02 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Boyoung Park; So Young Kim; Ji-Yeon Shin; Robert W Sanson-Fisher; Dong Wook Shin; Juhee Cho; Jong Hyock Park Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-04-02 Impact factor: 3.240