OBJECTIVES: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group is developing a computer-adaptive test (CAT) version of the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). We evaluated the measurement properties of the CAT versions of physical functioning (PF) and fatigue (FA) and compared these with the corresponding QLQ-C30 scales. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Based on international samples of more than 1,000 cancer patients, we simulated CAT administration of varying numbers of items and compared the resulting scores with those based on all items in the respective item pools. Furthermore, the relative validity (RV) of CATs was compared with that of the QLQ-C30 scales using known groups validity. RESULTS: For both dimensions, CATs of all lengths resulted in unbiased score estimates. CATs consisting of five or more items had reliability>0.90, correlated ≥ 0.97 with the full scale, and had root mean square error <0.25. The average RVs for these CATs ranged 1.02-1.33, indicating possible savings in sample size requirements of 3-42% using CAT. CONCLUSION: The CAT versions of PF and FA exhibited high levels of measurement precision and efficiency. The potential savings in sample size requirements using CATs compared with those using the original QLQ-C30 scales were typically 20% or more.
OBJECTIVES: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group is developing a computer-adaptive test (CAT) version of the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). We evaluated the measurement properties of the CAT versions of physical functioning (PF) and fatigue (FA) and compared these with the corresponding QLQ-C30 scales. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Based on international samples of more than 1,000 cancerpatients, we simulated CAT administration of varying numbers of items and compared the resulting scores with those based on all items in the respective item pools. Furthermore, the relative validity (RV) of CATs was compared with that of the QLQ-C30 scales using known groups validity. RESULTS: For both dimensions, CATs of all lengths resulted in unbiased score estimates. CATs consisting of five or more items had reliability>0.90, correlated ≥ 0.97 with the full scale, and had root mean square error <0.25. The average RVs for these CATs ranged 1.02-1.33, indicating possible savings in sample size requirements of 3-42% using CAT. CONCLUSION: The CAT versions of PF and FA exhibited high levels of measurement precision and efficiency. The potential savings in sample size requirements using CATs compared with those using the original QLQ-C30 scales were typically 20% or more.
Authors: Lise Holst Thamsborg; Morten Aa Petersen; Neil K Aaronson; Wei-Chu Chie; Anna Costantini; Bernhard Holzner; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw; Teresa Young; Mogens Groenvold Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-11-14 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Therese Juul; Morten Aagaard Petersen; Bernhard Holzner; Søren Laurberg; Peter Christensen; Mogens Grønvold Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Carol M Moinpour; Gary W Donaldson; Kimberly M Davis; Arnold L Potosky; Roxanne E Jensen; Julie R Gralow; Anthony L Back; Jimmy J Hwang; Jihye Yoon; Debra L Bernard; Deena R Loeffler; Nan E Rothrock; Ron D Hays; Bryce B Reeve; Ashley Wilder Smith; Elizabeth A Hahn; David Cella Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2016-07-28 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Eva-Maria Gamper; Morten Aa Petersen; Neil Aaronson; Anna Costantini; Johannes M Giesinger; Bernhard Holzner; Georg Kemmler; Anne Oberguggenberger; Susanne Singer; Teresa Young; Mogens Groenvold Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2016-05-06 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Linda Dirven; Mogens Groenvold; Martin J B Taphoorn; Thierry Conroy; Krzysztof A Tomaszewski; Teresa Young; Morten Aa Petersen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Eva-Maria Gamper; Mogens Groenvold; Morten Aa Petersen; Teresa Young; Anna Costantini; Neil Aaronson; Johannes M Giesinger; Verena Meraner; Georg Kemmler; Bernhard Holzner Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Chris Gibbons; Peter Bower; Karina Lovell; Jose Valderas; Suzanne Skevington Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2016-09-30 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Morten Aa Petersen; Neil K Aaronson; Wei-Chu Chie; Thierry Conroy; Anna Costantini; Eva Hammerlid; Marianne J Hjermstad; Stein Kaasa; Jon H Loge; Galina Velikova; Teresa Young; Mogens Groenvold Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-08-13 Impact factor: 4.147