Comparison of patient and proxy EORTC QLQ-C30 ratings in assessing the quality of life of cancer patients

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 51, Issue 7, 1998, Pages 617-631

  Sneeuw, Kommer C A ^a   Aaronson, Neil K ^a   Sprangers, Mirjam A G ^b   Detmar, Symone B ^a   Wever, Lidwina D V ^a   Schornagel, Jan H ^a  

^a NETHERLANDS CANCER INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Agreement; Proxy respondent; Quality of life; Questionnaire; Reliability; Validity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RELIABILITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FAMILY; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0032126711     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00040-7     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Aaronson N.K. Methodologic issues in assessing the quality of life of cancer patients. Cancer. 67:1991;844-850.
2. De Haan R., Aaronson N.K., Limburg M.et al. Measuring quality of life in stroke. Stroke. 24:1993;320-327.
3. Magaziner J. The use of proxy respondents in health studies of the aged. Wallace R.B., Woolson R.F. The Epidemiologic Study of the Elderly. 1992;Oxford University Press, New York.
4. Sprangers M.A.G., Aaronson N.K. The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease. A review J Clin Epidemiol. 45:1992;743-760.
5. Zimmerman S.I., Magaziner J. Methodological issues in measuring the functional status of cognitively impaired nursing home residents. The use of proxies and performance-based measures Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 8(Suppl. 1):1994;S281-S290.
6. Bassett S.S., Magaziner J., Hebel J.R. Reliability of proxy response on mental health indices for aged, community-dwelling women. Psychol Aging. 5:1990;127-132.
7. Epstein A.M., Hall J.A., Tognetti J.et al. Using proxies to evaluate quality of life. Can they provide valid information about patients' health status and satisfaction with medical care? Med Care. 27:1989;S91-S98.
8. Magaziner J., Simonsick E.M., Kashner T.M., Hebel J.R. Patient-proxy response comparability on measures of patient health and functional status. J Clin Epidemiol. 41:1988;1065-1074.
9. Magaziner J., Bassett S.S., Hebel J.R., Gruber-Baldini A. Use of proxies to measure health and functional status in epidemiologic studies of community-dwelling women aged 65 years and older. Am J Epidemiol. 143:1996;283-292.
10. McCusker J., Stoddard A.M. Use of a surrogate for the Sickness Impact Profile. Med Care. 22:1984;789-795.
11. Rothman M.L., Hedrick S.C., Bulcroft K.A.et al. The validity of proxy-generated scores as measures of patient health status. Med Care. 29:1991;115-124.
12. Segal M.E., Schall R.R. Determining functional/health status and its relation to disability in stroke survivors. Stroke. 25:1994;2391-2397.
13. Sneeuw K.C.A., Aaronson N.K., De Haan R.J., Limburg M. Assessing quality of life after stroke. The value and limitations of proxy ratings Stroke. 28:1997;1541-1549.
14. Clipp E.C., George L.K. Patients with cancer and their spouse caregivers. Cancer. 69:1992;1074-1079.
15. Farrow D.C., Samet J.M. Comparability of information provided by elderly cancer patients and surrogates regarding health and functional status, social network, and life events. Epidemiology. 1:1990;370-376.
16. Blazeby J.M., Williams M.H., Alderson D., Farndon J.R. Observer variation in assessment of quality of life in patients with oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg. 82:1995;1200-1203.
17. Sigurdardottir V., Brandberg Y., Sullivan M. Criterion-based validation of the EORTC QLQ-C36 in advanced melanoma. The CIPS questionnaire and proxy raters Qual Life Res. 5:1996;375-386.
18. Sneeuw K.C.A., Aaronson N.K., Osoba D.et al. The use of significant others as proxy raters of the quality of life of patients with brain cancer. Med Care. 35:1997;490-506.
19. Sneeuw K.C.A., Aaronson N.K., Sprangers M.A.G.et al. Value of caregiver ratings in evaluating the quality of life of patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 15:1997;1206-1217.
20. Hays R.D., Vickrey B.G., Hermann B.P.et al. Agreement between self reports and proxy reports of quality of life in epilepsy patients. Qual Life Res. 4:1995;159-168.
21. Nunnally J.C., Bernstein I.H. Psychometric Theory. 3:1994;McGraw-Hill, New York.
22. Aaronson N.K., Ahmedzai S., Bergman B.et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30. A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology J Natl Cancer Inst. 85:1993;365-376.
23. Osoba D., Aaronson N., Zee B.et al. Modification of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 2.0) based on content validity and reliability testing in large samples of patients with cancer. Qual Life Res. 6:1997;103-108.
24. Aaronson N.K., Cull A., Kaasa S., Sprangers M.A.G. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) modular approach to quality of life assessment in oncology. An update Spilker B. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. 1996;Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia.
25. Hjermstad M.J., Fossa S.D., Bjordal K., Kaasa S. Test/retest study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality-of-Life Questionnaire. J Clin Oncol. 13:1995;1249-1254.
26. Osoba D., Rodrigues G., Myles J., Pater J. Significance of changes in health-related quality of life (QOL) scores in women receiving chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. Qual Life Res. 4:1995;468-469.
27. Zubrod C.G., Schneiderman M., Frei E.et al. Appraisal of methods for the study of chemotherapy of cancer in man. Comparative therapeutic trial of nitrogen mustard and triethylene thiophosphoramide J Chronic Dis. 11:1960;7-33.
28. Conill C., Verger E., Salamero M. Performance status assessment in cancer patients. Cancer. 65:1990;1864-1866.
29. Berwick D.M., Murphy J.M., Goldman P.A.et al. Performance of a five-item mental health screening test. Med Care. 29:1991;169-176.
30. Hays R., Stewart A., Hayashi T. A five-item measure of socially desirable response set. Educ Psychol Meas. 49:1989;629-636.
31. Crowne D.P., Marlowe D. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. J Consult Psychol. 24:1960;349-354.
32. Schreurs P.J.G., Van de Willige G., Brosschot J.F.et al. De Utrechtse Coping Lijst (UCL). handleiding [The Utrecht Coping List (UCL): manual]:1993;Swets-Zeitlinger, Lisse.
33. Wijker W., Monincx W., Birnie E.et al. Comparison of two forms of gynaecological care. At home and in the hospital Qual Life Newsletter. 7:1993;4.
34. Norbeck J.S., Lindsey A.M., Carrieri V.L. The development of an instrument to measure social support. Nurs Res. 30:1981;264-269.
35. Ganz P.A., Schag C.A.C., Lee J.J., Sim M.S. The CARES. A generic measure of health-related quality of life for patients with cancer Qual Life Res. 1:1992;19-29.
36. Van den Borne H.W., Pruyn J.F.A. Achtergronden en betekenis van lotgenotencontact bij kankerpatienten [Background and meaning of support groups for cancer patients]. 1983;IVA, Tilburg.
37. Cronbach L.J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 16:1951;297-334.
38. Lee J., Koh D., Ong C.N. Statistical evaluation of agreement between two methods for measuring a quantitative variable. Comput Biol Med. 19:1989;61-70.
39. Nelson L.M., Longstreth W.T., Koepsell T.D., Van Belle G. Proxy respondents in epidemiologic research. Epidemiol Rev. 12:1990;71-86.
40. Bartko J.J. The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psychol Rep. 19:1966;3-11.
41. Landis J.R., Koch G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 33:1977;159-174.
42. Campbell D.T., Fiske D.W. Convergent and discriminant validity by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull. 56:1959;81-105.
43. Marshall G.N., Hays R.D., Nicholas R. Evaluating agreement between clinical assessment methods. Int J Methods Psychiat Res. 4:1994;249-257.
44. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 1988;Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
45. Bland J.M., Altman D.G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 8476:1986;307-310.
46. Deyo R.A., Diehr P., Patrick D.L. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation Control Clin Trials. 12:1991;142S-158S.
47. Hays R.D., Anderson R., Revicki D. Psychometric considerations in evaluating health-related quality of life measures. Qual Life Res. 2:1993;441-449.
48. Ware J.E., Kosinski M., Bayliss M.S.et al. Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures. Summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study Med Care. 33:1995;AS264-AS279.
49. Liang M.H., Larson M.G., Cullen K.E., Schwartz J.A. Comparative measurement efficiency and sensitivity of five health status instruments for arthritis research. Arthritis Rheum. 28:1985;542-547.
50. Ware J.E., Sherbourne C.D. A 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 30:1992;473-483.