Literature DB >> 8763800

Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G): non-response to individual questions.

D L Fairclough1, D F Cella.   

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation is to examine methods of scoring the FACT-G when there is non-response to individual questions. Using completed questionnaires from 350 patients, random and non-random missing responses where simulated. Seven methods of scoring the FACT-G are compared on the basis of accuracy (bias and precision) of both population estimates and prediction of individual scores. Substituting the mean of the completed items in the subscale when more than 50% are completed is generally the most unbiased and precise approach. Case deletion is the worst approach and results in clinically significant bias when the missing responses were non-random and a lack of precision when the rate of non-response was high.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8763800     DOI: 10.1007/bf00433916

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  7 in total

1.  Methods for the analysis of informatively censored longitudinal data.

Authors:  M D Schluchter
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1992 Oct-Nov       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Approaches to the analysis of quality of life data: experiences gained from a medical research council lung cancer working party palliative chemotherapy trial.

Authors:  P Hopwood; R J Stephens; D Machin
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Unbalanced repeated-measures models with structured covariance matrices.

Authors:  R I Jennrich; M D Schluchter
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  The MOS short-form general health survey. Reliability and validity in a patient population.

Authors:  A L Stewart; R D Hays; J E Ware
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Modelling progression of CD4-lymphocyte count and its relationship to survival time.

Authors:  V De Gruttola; X M Tu
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients: the Functional Living Index-Cancer: development and validation.

Authors:  H Schipper; J Clinch; A McMurray; M Levitt
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1984-05       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure.

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

  7 in total
  71 in total

1.  The functional assessment of cancer therapy-BRM (FACT-BRM): a new tool for the assessment of quality of life in patients treated with biologic response modifiers.

Authors:  J Bacik; M Mazumdar; B A Murphy; D L Fairclough; S Eremenco; T Mariani; R J Motzer; D Cella
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Factors associated with cancer survivors' selection between two group physical activity programs.

Authors:  Cindy L Carter; Georgiana Onicescu; Kathleen B Cartmell; Katherine R Sterba; James Tomsic; Todd Fox; Erica Dunmeyer; Anthony J Alberg
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2010-07-27       Impact factor: 4.442

3.  Missing data methods for dealing with missing items in quality of life questionnaires. A comparison by simulation of personal mean score, full information maximum likelihood, multiple imputation, and hot deck techniques applied to the SF-36 in the French 2003 decennial health survey.

Authors:  Hugo Peyre; Alain Leplège; Joël Coste
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  A new index of priority symptoms in advanced ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Sally E Jensen; Sarah K Rosenbloom; Jennifer L Beaumont; Amy Abernethy; Paul B Jacobsen; Karen Syrjala; David Cella
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2010-11-13       Impact factor: 5.482

5.  PedsQL™ Cognitive Functioning Scale in pediatric liver transplant recipients: feasibility, reliability, and validity.

Authors:  James W Varni; Christine A Limbers; Lisa G Sorensen; Katie Neighbors; Karen Martz; John C Bucuvalas; Estella M Alonso
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Response and non-response to a quality-of-life question on sexual life: a case study of the simple mean imputation method.

Authors:  Yin Bun Cheung; Rhian Daniel; Gim Yew Ng
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-05-27       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Validation of modified forms of the PedsQL generic core scales and cancer module scales for adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer or a blood disorder.

Authors:  Jane E Ewing; Madeleine T King; Narelle F Smith
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-01-23       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  A comparison of quality-of-life domains and clinical factors in ovarian cancer patients: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

Authors:  Vivian E von Gruenigen; Helen Q Huang; Karen M Gil; Heidi E Gibbons; Bradley J Monk; Peter G Rose; Deborah K Armstrong; David Cella; Lari Wenzel
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.612

Review 9.  Capturing and Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcomes into Clinical Trials: Practical Considerations for Clinicians.

Authors:  Juliana Perez Botero; Gita Thanarajasingam; Rahma Warsame
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 5.075

10.  Does adherence to perioperative enhanced recovery pathway elements influence patient-reported recovery following colorectal resection?

Authors:  Nicolò Pecorelli; Saba Balvardi; A Sender Liberman; Patrick Charlebois; Barry Stein; Franco Carli; Liane S Feldman; Julio F Fiore
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.