Literature DB >> 8763806

Criterion-based validation of the EORTC QLQ-C36 in advanced melanoma: the CIPS questionnaire and proxy raters.

V Sigurdardóttir1, Y Brandberg, M Sullivan.   

Abstract

An extensive quality of life (QOL) investigation of the effects of chemotherapy in patients with generalized malignant melanoma included a validation study of involved questionnaires. The QOL domains of the three basic quality of life questionnaires, the EORTC QLQ-C36 (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire), a study-specific malignant melanoma (MM) module and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale vs. the Cancer Inventory of Problem Situations (CIPS) were validated by correlation analyses. The value of using attending nurses and/or next of kin to assess the patients situation was also examined. Functional and symptom scales of the C36 and the subscales of the HAD showed appropriate convergent and discriminant validity when compared with the CIPS. The subscales of the MM module had less clear relationships, probably due to lack of accordance in the CIPS. Assessments of attending nurses revealed very low correlations with the patients' measures. They underestimated significantly series of specific symptoms and overestimated nausea and the overall quality of life of the patients. However, assessments of close relatives, mostly spouses, showed moderate to high correlations and no significant difference. These results further strengthen the overall validity of the modular approach of the EORTC QLQ technique. In this context of active chemotherapy in patients with advanced cancer disease, relatives seem to be better surrogates than the attending nurses in assessing the patients' quality of life.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8763806     DOI: 10.1007/bf00433922

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


  29 in total

1.  Quality of life evaluation by the EORTC questionnaire technique in patients with generalized malignant melanoma on chemotherapy.

Authors:  V Sigurdardóttir; C Bolund; M Sullivan
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.089

Review 2.  An introduction to test theory.

Authors:  D S Tulsky
Journal:  Oncology (Williston Park)       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 2.990

3.  Assessing problems of cancer patients: psychometric properties of the cancer inventory of problem situations.

Authors:  C A Schag; R L Heinrich; R L Aadland; P A Ganz
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 4.267

4.  The use of female spouse proxies in common symptom reporting.

Authors:  B R Clarridge; M P Massagli
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Patients' and nurses' perceptions of symptom distress in cancer.

Authors:  S Holmes; E Eburn
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 3.187

6.  Symptoms by age and sex. The population studies of men and women in Gothenburg, Sweden.

Authors:  G Tibblin; C Bengtsson; B Furunes; L Lapidus
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 2.581

7.  The impact of generalized malignant melanoma on quality of life evaluated by the EORTC questionnaire technique.

Authors:  V Sigurdardóttir; C Bolund; Y Brandberg; M Sullivan
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Using proxies to evaluate quality of life. Can they provide valid information about patients' health status and satisfaction with medical care?

Authors:  A M Epstein; J A Hall; J Tognetti; L H Son; L Conant
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Psychological effects of participation in a prevention programme for individuals with increased risk for malignant melanoma.

Authors:  Y Brandberg; M Bergenmar; C Bolund; E Månsson-Brahme; U Ringborg; P O Sjødén
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 9.162

10.  Quality of life during chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer. II. A longitudinal study of the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire and comparison with the Sickness Impact Profile.

Authors:  B Bergman; M Sullivan; S Sörenson
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.089

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review of caregiver responses for patient health-related quality of life in adult cancer care.

Authors:  Jessica K Roydhouse; Ira B Wilson
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Proxy ratings of health related quality of life in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Jennifer L Steel; David A Geller; Brian I Carr
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Patterns and predictors of symptom incongruence in older couples coping with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kerri M Winters-Stone; Karen S Lyons; Jill A Bennett; Tomasz M Beer
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-12-17       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Proxy assessment of quality of life in patients with prostate cancer: how accurate are partners and urologists?

Authors:  R Pearcy; D Waldron; C O'Boyle; R MacDonagh
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Symptom profiles in children with advanced cancer: Patient, family caregiver, and oncologist ratings.

Authors:  Donna S Zhukovsky; Cathy L Rozmus; Rhonda S Robert; Eduardo Bruera; Robert J Wells; Gary B Chisholm; Julio A Allo; Marlene Z Cohen
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Confidant and breast cancer patient reports of quality of life.

Authors:  Ann K Sandgren; Amy B Mullens; Shannon C Erickson; Kathleen M Romanek; Kevin D McCaul
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Evaluating the quality of life of cancer patients: assessments by patients, significant others, physicians and nurses.

Authors:  K C Sneeuw; N K Aaronson; M A Sprangers; S B Detmar; L D Wever; J H Schornagel
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 7.640

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.