Literature DB >> 24958466

Test-Retest Reliability of an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) Version of the EORTC QLQ-C30.

J Jason Lundy1, Stephen Joel Coons, Neil K Aaronson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the test-retest reliability of an interactive voice response (IVR) version of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30.
METHODS: A convenience sample of outpatient cancer clinic patients (n = 127) was asked to complete the IVR version of the QLQ-C30 twice, 2 days apart. The QLQ-C30 is a 30-item, cancer-specific questionnaire composed of single-item and multi-item scales. The instrument has five functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), three symptom scales (fatigue, pain, and nausea/vomiting), and a global quality-of-life scale. The remaining single items assess dyspnea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation, diarrhea, and financial problems. The analyses focused on intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), comparing the ICC 95 % lower confidence interval (CI) value with a critical value of 0.70.
RESULTS: The ICCs for the nine multi-item scales were all above 0.69, ranging from 0.698 to 0.926 (ICC 95 % lower CI value range 0.588-0.895). All of the scales were significantly different from our threshold reliability of 0.70, with the exception of the cognitive functioning scale. The ICCs for the six single items ranged from 0.741 to 0.883 (ICC 95 % lower CI value range 0.646-0.835), and three of the six were statistically different from 0.70. The evidence supports the stability of 11 of the 15 scores obtained on the IVR version of the QLQ-C30 upon repeated measurement.
CONCLUSION: The measurement equivalence of the IVR and paper versions of the QLQ-C30 has been reported elsewhere. This analysis provides evidence demonstrating adequate test-retest reliability of the IVR version for 11 of the QLQ-C30's 15 scores.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 24958466     DOI: 10.1007/s40271-014-0071-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient        ISSN: 1178-1653            Impact factor:   3.883


  11 in total

1.  A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments.

Authors:  Robert G Marx; Alia Menezes; Lois Horovitz; Edward C Jones; Russell F Warren
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 2.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability.

Authors:  P E Shrout; J L Fleiss
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires.

Authors:  G Velikova; E P Wright; A B Smith; A Cull; A Gould; D Forman; T Perren; M Stead; J Brown; P J Selby
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 4.  Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: issues, evidence and recommendations.

Authors:  T Luckett; M T King; P N Butow; M Oguchi; N Rankin; M A Price; N A Hackl; G Heading
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2011-02-21       Impact factor: 32.976

5.  Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report.

Authors:  Stephen Joel Coons; Chad J Gwaltney; Ron D Hays; J Jason Lundy; Jeff A Sloan; Dennis A Revicki; William R Lenderking; David Cella; Ethan Basch
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2008-11-11       Impact factor: 5.725

6.  Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review.

Authors:  Chad J Gwaltney; Alan L Shields; Saul Shiffman
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2008 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.725

7.  The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1993-03-03       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Testing the measurement equivalence of paper and interactive voice response system versions of the EORTC QLQ-C30.

Authors:  J Jason Lundy; Stephen Joel Coons; Neil K Aaronson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-06-14       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Test/retest study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality-of-Life Questionnaire.

Authors:  M J Hjermstad; S D Fossa; K Bjordal; S Kaasa
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Responsiveness of EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR38 and FACT-C quality of life questionnaires in patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Lionel Uwer; Christine Rotonda; Francis Guillemin; Joëlle Miny; Marie-Christine Kaminsky; Mariette Mercier; Laetitia Tournier-Rangeard; Isabelle Leonard; Philippe Montcuquet; Philippe Rauch; Thierry Conroy
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 3.186

View more
  3 in total

1.  Assessment of an interactive voice response system for identifying falls in a statewide sample of older adults.

Authors:  Steven M Albert; Jennifer King; Robert M Keene
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2014-12-13       Impact factor: 4.018

2.  Temporal stability of quality of life assessments in cancer patients.

Authors:  Andreas Hinz; Thomas Schulte; Jörg Rassler; Markus Zenger; Kristina Geue
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-04       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Equivalence testing of a newly developed interviewer-led telephone script for the EORTC QLQ-C30.

Authors:  Claire Piccinin; Madeline Pe; Dagmara Kuliś; James W Shaw; Sally J Wheelwright; Andrew Bottomley
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-07-20       Impact factor: 4.147

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.