Jin-Shei Lai1, Jennifer L Beaumont2, Cindy J Nowinski2, David Cella2, William F Hartsell3, John Han-Chih Chang3, Peter E Manley4, Stewart Goldman5. 1. Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Pediatrics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA. Electronic address: js-lai@northwestern.edu. 2. Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA. 3. Northwestern Medicine Chicago Proton Center, Warrenville, Illinois, USA; Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA. 4. Children's Hospital Boston and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Pediatrics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Monitoring of health-related quality of life and symptoms of patients with brain tumors is needed yet not always feasible. This is partially due to lack of brief-yet-precise assessments with minimal administration burden that are easily incorporated into clinics. Dynamic computerized adaptive testing (CAT) or static fixed-length short forms, derived from psychometrically sound item banks, are designed to fill this void. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the comparability of scores obtained from CATs and short forms. METHODS: Patients (ages 7-22 years) were recruited from brain tumor clinics and completed Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System CATs and short forms (Fatigue, Mobility, Upper Extremity, Depressive Symptoms, Anxiety, and Peer Relationships). Pearson correlations, paired t-tests, and Cohen's d were used to evaluate the relationship, significant differences, and the magnitude of the difference between these two scores, respectively. RESULTS: Data from 161 patients with brain tumors were analyzed. Patients completed each CAT within 2 minutes. Scores obtained from CATs and short forms were highly correlated (r = 0.95-0.98). Significantly different CAT vs. short-form scores were found on 4 (of 6) domains yet with negligible effect sizes (|d| < 0.09). These relationships varied across patients with different levels of reported symptoms, with the strongest association at the worst or best symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the comparability of scores from CATs and short forms. Yet the agreement between these two varied across degrees of symptom severity which was a result of the ceiling effects of static short forms. We recommend CATs to enable individualized assessment for longitudinal monitoring.
CONTEXT: Monitoring of health-related quality of life and symptoms of patients with brain tumors is needed yet not always feasible. This is partially due to lack of brief-yet-precise assessments with minimal administration burden that are easily incorporated into clinics. Dynamic computerized adaptive testing (CAT) or static fixed-length short forms, derived from psychometrically sound item banks, are designed to fill this void. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the comparability of scores obtained from CATs and short forms. METHODS:Patients (ages 7-22 years) were recruited from brain tumor clinics and completed Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System CATs and short forms (Fatigue, Mobility, Upper Extremity, Depressive Symptoms, Anxiety, and Peer Relationships). Pearson correlations, paired t-tests, and Cohen's d were used to evaluate the relationship, significant differences, and the magnitude of the difference between these two scores, respectively. RESULTS: Data from 161 patients with brain tumors were analyzed. Patients completed each CAT within 2 minutes. Scores obtained from CATs and short forms were highly correlated (r = 0.95-0.98). Significantly different CAT vs. short-form scores were found on 4 (of 6) domains yet with negligible effect sizes (|d| < 0.09). These relationships varied across patients with different levels of reported symptoms, with the strongest association at the worst or best symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the comparability of scores from CATs and short forms. Yet the agreement between these two varied across degrees of symptom severity which was a result of the ceiling effects of static short forms. We recommend CATs to enable individualized assessment for longitudinal monitoring.
Authors: Jin-Shei Lai; Brian D Stucky; David Thissen; James W Varni; Esi Morgan DeWitt; Debra E Irwin; Karin B Yeatts; Darren A DeWalt Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-02-02 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Christina G Salley; Larissa L Hewitt; Andrea F Patenaude; Michael W Vasey; Keith O Yeates; Cynthia A Gerhardt; Kathryn Vannatta Journal: J Pediatr Psychol Date: 2014-10-06
Authors: Bryce B Reeve; David Thissen; Darren A DeWalt; I-Chan Huang; Yang Liu; Brooke Magnus; Hally Quinn; Heather E Gross; Pamela A Kisala; Pengsheng Ni; Stephen Haley; M J Mulcahey; Susie Charlifue; Robin A Hanks; Mary Slavin; Alan Jette; David S Tulsky Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-09-30 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jin-Shei Lai; Frank Zelko; Zeeshan Butt; David Cella; Mark W Kieran; Kevin R Krull; Susan Magasi; Stewart Goldman Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2010-07-23 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Jin-Shei Lai; Cindy Nowinski; David Victorson; Rita Bode; Tracy Podrabsky; Natalie McKinney; Don Straube; Gregory L Holmes; Craig M McDonald; Erik Henricson; R Ted Abresch; Claudia S Moy; David Cella Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2011-07-25 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: JoAnn Duckworth; Trishana Nayiager; Eleanor Pullenayegum; Anthony Whitton; Robert Hollenberg; John Horsman; William Furlong; Rachel Spitzer; Ronald D Barr Journal: J Pediatr Hematol Oncol Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 1.289
Authors: Galina Velikova; Laura Booth; Adam B Smith; Paul M Brown; Pamela Lynch; Julia M Brown; Peter J Selby Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-02-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Angela Stover; Debra E Irwin; Ronald C Chen; Bhishamjit S Chera; Deborah K Mayer; Hyman B Muss; Donald L Rosenstein; Thomas C Shea; William A Wood; Jessica C Lyons; Bryce B Reeve Journal: EGEMS (Wash DC) Date: 2015-10-29
Authors: Nils D Arvold; Terri S Armstrong; Katherine E Warren; Susan M Chang; Lisa M DeAngelis; Jaishri Blakeley; Marc C Chamberlain; Erin Dunbar; Herbert H Loong; David R Macdonald; David A Reardon; Michael A Vogelbaum; Ying Yuan; Michael Weller; Martin van den Bent; Patrick Y Wen Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Ruchi N Patel; Valeria G Esparza; Jin-Shei Lai; Elizabeth L Gray; Bryce B Reeve; Rowland W Chang; David Cella; Kaveh Ardalan Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2021-07-30 Impact factor: 5.178
Authors: Salome Christen; Katharina Roser; Renée L Mulder; Anica Ilic; Hanne C Lie; Jacqueline J Loonen; Anneli V Mellblom; Leontien C M Kremer; Melissa M Hudson; Louis S Constine; Roderick Skinner; Katrin Scheinemann; Jordan Gilleland Marchak; Gisela Michel Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2020-08-25 Impact factor: 4.442