Ting-Ting Wang1, Li-Yun He2, Ming Zhang3, Shao-Mo Wang4, Ai-Guang Zhao4, Lei Chu5, Li-Yuan Zhang6, Sheng-Fu You4, Jie You7. 1. Department of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200011, China. 2. Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100142, China. 3. Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200030, China. 4. Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 200032, China. 5. Department of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine, Tumor Hospital of Qingdao, Qingdao, Shandong Province, 266042, China. 6. Putuo Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 200062, China. 7. Department of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200011, China. yooujieyj@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop an improved version of the Quality-of-Life Assessment instrument for Lung Cancer Patients Based on Traditional Chinese Medicine (QLASTCM-Lu) and to evaluate its psychometric property. METHODS: The structured group method and the theory in developing rating scale were employed to revise the preliminary scale. The psychometric property (reliability, validity, and responsiveness) of the established QLASTCM-Lu (modified) were evaluated by quality of life data measured in 100 lung cancer patients. Statistical analyses were made accordingly by way of correlation analysis, factor analysis and paired t-test. RESULTS: The internal consistency reliability of the overall scale and all domains was from 0.80 to 0.94. Correlation and factor analyses demonstrated that the scale was good in construct validity. The criterion validity was formed with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lung Cancer (EORTC QLQ-LC43) as the criterion. Statistically significant changes were found apart from such domain as "mental condition" and "social function", with the standardized response means being close to those of QLQ-LC43. CONCLUSION: QLASTCM-Lu (modified) could be used to measure the quality of life of lung cancer patients with good reliability, validity and a certain degree of responsiveness.
OBJECTIVE: To develop an improved version of the Quality-of-Life Assessment instrument for Lung CancerPatients Based on Traditional Chinese Medicine (QLASTCM-Lu) and to evaluate its psychometric property. METHODS: The structured group method and the theory in developing rating scale were employed to revise the preliminary scale. The psychometric property (reliability, validity, and responsiveness) of the established QLASTCM-Lu (modified) were evaluated by quality of life data measured in 100 lung cancerpatients. Statistical analyses were made accordingly by way of correlation analysis, factor analysis and paired t-test. RESULTS: The internal consistency reliability of the overall scale and all domains was from 0.80 to 0.94. Correlation and factor analyses demonstrated that the scale was good in construct validity. The criterion validity was formed with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire-Lung Cancer (EORTC QLQ-LC43) as the criterion. Statistically significant changes were found apart from such domain as "mental condition" and "social function", with the standardized response means being close to those of QLQ-LC43. CONCLUSION: QLASTCM-Lu (modified) could be used to measure the quality of life of lung cancerpatients with good reliability, validity and a certain degree of responsiveness.
Entities:
Keywords:
Chinese medicine; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer; lung cancer; quality of life; scale
Authors: Sheila N Garland; Guy Pelletier; Andrew Lawe; Bradly J Biagioni; Jay Easaw; Michael Eliasziw; David Cella; Oliver F Bathe Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-10-19 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Lindsey A Torre; Freddie Bray; Rebecca L Siegel; Jacques Ferlay; Joannie Lortet-Tieulent; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2015-02-04 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: D F Cella; D S Tulsky; G Gray; B Sarafian; E Linn; A Bonomi; M Silberman; S B Yellen; P Winicour; J Brannon Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1993-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Sean Blandin Knight; Phil A Crosbie; Haval Balata; Jakub Chudziak; Tracy Hussell; Caroline Dive Journal: Open Biol Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 6.411
Authors: Hui Huang; Kuizhong Shan; Min Cai; Hong Chen; Fengmei Wu; Xiaoyan Zhao; Huawei Zhuang; Hong Li; Suofang Shi Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2021-10-26 Impact factor: 2.629