Assessing responsiveness of cancer-related fatigue instruments: Distribution-based and individual anchor-based methods

Oncologist

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 495-504

  Shun, Shiow Ching ^a,c   Beck, Susan L ^b   Pett, Marjorie A ^b   Richardson, Stephanie J ^b  

^a NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

^c NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Fatigue; Individual difference; Instrument; Neoplasm; Sensitivity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER FATIGUE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTPATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; FATIGUE; FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TAIWAN;

EID: 34247844481     PISSN: 10837159     EISSN: 1549490X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.12-4-495     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Mishel MH. Methodological studies: Instrument development. In: Brink PJ, Wood MJ, eds. Advanced Design in Nursing Research, Second Edition. New Delhi: Sage 1998;235-282.
2. Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002;11:193-205.
3. Terwee CB, Dekker FW, Wiersinga WM et al. On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: Guidelines for instrument evaluation. Qual Life Res 2003;12:349-362.
4. Hays RD, Farivar SS, Liu H. Approaches and recommendations for estimating minimally important differences for health-related quality of life measures. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2005;2:63-67.
5. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989;10:407-415.
6. Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA. Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): A literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2002;14:109-114.
7. Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care 2003;41:582-592.
8. Norman GR, Sridhar FG, Guyatt GH et al. Relation of distribution- and anchor-based approaches in interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life. Med Care 2001;39:1039-1047.
9. Wyrwich KW, Bullinger M, Aaronson N et al. Estimating clinically significant differences in quality of life outcomes. Qual Life Res 2005;14:285-295.
10. Rodrigues G, Bezjak A, Osoba D et al. The relationship of changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 scores to ratings on the Subjective Significance Questionnaire in men with localized prostate cancer. Qual Life Res 2004;13:1235-1246.
11. Ferrell BR, Grant M, Dean GE et al. "Bone tired ": The experience of fatigue and its impact on quality of life. Oncol Nurs Forum 1996;23:1539-1547.
12. Portenoy RK, Itri LM. Cancer-related fatigue: Guidelines for evaluation and management. The Oncologist 1999;4:1-10.
13. Wu HS, McSweeney M. Measurement of fatigue in people with cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 2001;28:1371-1384.
14. Beck SL, Erickson J, Shun S-C. Measuring Oncology Nursing Sensitive Patient Outcomes: Evidence-Based Summaries - Fatigue. Available at http://www.ons.org/research/outcomes/measuring.shtml 2004. Accessed August 7, 2004.
15. Schwartz AL, Meek PM, Nail LM et al. Measurement of fatigue. Determining minimally important clinical differences. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:239-244.
16. Cella D, Eton DT, Lai JS et al. Combining anchor and distribution-based methods to derive minimal clinically important differences on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) anemia and fatigue scales. J Pain Symptom Manage 2002;24:547-561.
17. Messias DK, Yeager KA, Dibble SL et al. Patients' perspectives of fatigue while undergoing chemotherapy. Oncol Nurs Forum 1997;24:43-48.
18. Schwartz AL. Daily fatigue patterns and effect of exercise in women with breast cancer. Cancer Pract 2000;8:16-24.
19. Berger AM. Patterns of fatigue and activity and rest during adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy. Oncol Nurs Forum 1998;25:51-62.
20. Schreier AM, Williams SA. Anxiety and quality of life of women who receive radiation or chemotherapy for breast cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 2004;31:127-130.
21. Okuyama T, Akechi T, Kugaya A et al. Development and validation of the cancer fatigue scale: A brief, three-dimensional, self-rating scale for assessment of fatigue in cancer patients. J Pain Symptom Manage 2000;19:5-14.
22. Schwartz A, Meek P. Additional construct validity of the Schwartz Cancer Fatigue Scale. J Nurs Meas 1999;7:35-45.
23. Hann DM, Jacobsen PB, Azzarello LM et al. Measurement of fatigue in cancer patients: Development and validation of the Fatigue Symptom Inventory. Qual Life Res 1998;7:301-310.
24. Hann DM, Denniston MM, Baker F. Measurement of fatigue in cancer patients: Further validation of the Fatigue Symptom Inventory. Qual Life Res 2000;9:847-854.
25. Schoua-Glusberg A. Translation of Survey Instruments. Available at http://www.dc-aapor.org/documents/schoua-glusberg.ppt.Accessed October 7, 2004.
26. Shun SC, Beck SL, Pett MA et al. Psychometric testing of three Chinese fatigue instruments in Taiwan. J Pain Symptom Manage 2006;32:155-167.
27. Cella D, Hahn EA, Dineen K. Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: Differences between improvement and worsening. Qual Life Res 2002;11:207-221.
28. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A et al. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47:81-87.
29. Ballinger GA. Using generalized estimating equations for longitudinal data analysis. Organ Res Methods 2004;7:127-149.
30. Geinitz H, Zimmermann FB, Thamm R et al. Fatigue in patients with adjuvant radiation therapy for breast cancer: Long-term follow-up. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2004;130:327-333.
31. Shun SC, Lai YH, Jing TT et al. Fatigue patterns and correlates in male liver cancer patients receiving transcatheter hepatic arterial chemoembolization. Support Care Cancer 2005;13:311-317.
32. Wratten C, Kilmurray J, Nash S et al. Fatigue during breast radiotherapy and its relationship to biological factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;59:160-167.
33. Frost MH, Bonomi AE, Ferrans CE et al. Patient, clinician, and population perspectives on determining the clinical significance of quality-of-life scores. Mayo Clin Proc 2002;77:488-494.
34. Brealey S. Measuring patient health status in rheumatoid arthritis - what is a minimal clinically important difference? J Rheumatol 2004;31:1026-1028.
35. Stucki G, Daltroy L, Katz JN et al. Interpretation of change scores in ordinal clinical scales and health status measures: The whole may not equal the sum of the parts. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:711-717.
36. Meek PM, Nail LM, Barsevick A et al. Psychometric testing of fatigue instruments for use with cancer patients. Nurs Res 2000;49:181-190.
37. de Jong N, Courtens AM, Abu-Saad HH et al. Fatigue in patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy: A review of the literature. Cancer Nurs 2002;25:283-297.
38. Schwartz AL, Nail LM, Chen S et al. Fatigue patterns observed in patients receiving chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Cancer Invest 2000;18:11-19.
39. Wyrwich KW, Wolinsky FD. Identifying meaningful intra-individual change standards for health-related quality of life measures. J Eval Clin Pract 2000;6:39-49.
40. Wyrwich KW. Minimal important difference thresholds and the standard error of measurement: Is there a connection? J Biopharm Stat 2004;14:97-110.
41. Sprangers MA, Van Dam FS, Broersen J et al. Revealing response shift in longitudinal research on fatigue - the use of the thentest approach. Acta Oncol 1999;38:709-718.