Evaluation of mode equivalence of the MSKCC Bowel Function Instrument, LASA Quality of Life, and Subjective Significance Questionnaire items administered by Web, interactive voice response system (IVRS), and paper

Quality of Life Research

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 1123-1130

  Bennett, Antonia V ^a   Keenoy, Kathleen ^b   Shouery, Marwan ^b   Basch, Ethan ^a,b   Temple, Larissa K ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Electronic PRO capture; Mode equivalence; Quality of life; Rectal cancer

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSESSMENT OF HUMANS; BOWEL FUNCTION INSTRUMENT; CANCER PATIENT; COLON CANCER; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERACTIVE VOICE RESPONSE SYSTEM; INTESTINE FUNCTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RECTUM CANCER; SELF REPORT; SUBJECTIVE SIGNIFICANCE QUESTIONNAIRE; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; AGED; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS;

LIPID; LIPID-ASSOCIATED SIALIC ACID; N ACETYLNEURAMINIC ACID;

AGED; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIPIDS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; N-ACETYLNEURAMINIC ACID; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; QUALITY OF LIFE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84947755095     PISSN: 09629343     EISSN: 15732649     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-1162-9     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Gwaltney, C. J., Shields, A. L., & Shiffman, S. (2008). Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: A meta-analytic review. Value in Health,11(2), 322–333.
2. Coons, S. J., Gwaltney, C. J., Hays, R. D., et al. (2009). Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value in Health,12(4), 419–429.
3. Temple, L. K., Bacik, J., Savatta, S. G., et al. (2005). The development of a validated instrument to evaluate bowel function after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum,48(7), 1353–1365.
4. Chen, T. Y., Emertsen, K. J., & Laurberg, S. (2015). What are the best questionnaires to capture anorectal function after surgery in rectal cancer? Current Colorectal Cancer Reports,11, 37–43.
5. Wong, C., Chen, J., Yu, C. L., Sham, M., & Lam, C. L. (2015). Systemic review recommends the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer colorectal cancer-specific module for measuring quality of life in colorectal cancer patients. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,68(3), 266–278.
6. Locke, D. E., Decker, P. A., Sloan, J. A., et al. (2007). Validation of single-item linear analog scale assessment of quality of life in neuro-oncology patients. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management,34(6), 628–638.
7. Osoba, D., Rodrigues, G., Myles, J., Zee, B., & Pater, J. (1998). Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. Journal of Clinical Oncology,16(1), 139–144.
8. Bennett, A. V., Jensen, R. E., & Basch, E. (2012). Electronic patient-reported outcome systems in oncology clinical practice. CA: Cancer Journal for Clinicians,62(5), 337–347.
9. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika,16, 297–334.
10. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
11. Yarandi, H. (2004). Crossover designs and proc mixed in SAS. Paper SD04. In The proceedings of the SouthEast SAS Users Group, Nashville, TN, 2004. http://analytics.ncsu.edu/sesug/2004/SD04-Yarandi.pdf.
12. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
13. Walters, S. J., Campbell, M. J., & Paisley, S. (2001). Methods for determining sample sizes for studies involving health-related quality of life measures: A tutorial. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology,2, 83–99.
14. Stratford, P. W., & Binkley, J. M. (1999). Applying the results of self-report measures to individual patients: An example using the Roland–Morris Questionnaire. Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy,29(4), 232–239.
15. Lundy, J. J., & Coons, S. J. (2011). Measurement equivalence of interactive voice response and paper versions of the EQ-5D in a cancer patient sample. Value in Health,14(6), 867–871.
16. Lundy, J. J., Coons, S. J., & Aaronson, N. K. (2014). Testing the measurement equivalence of paper and interactive voice response system versions of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research,23(1), 229–237.
17. Rush, A. J., Bernstein, I. H., Trivedi, M. H., et al. (2006). An evaluation of the quick inventory of depressive symptomatology and the Hamilton rating scale for depression: A sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression trial report. Biological Psychiatry,59(6), 493–501.
18. Dunn, J. A., Arakawa, R., Greist, J. H., & Clayton, A. H. (2007). Assessing the onset of antidepressant-induced sexual dysfunction using interactive voice response technology. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry,68(4), 525–532.
19. Agel, J., Rockwood, T., Mundt, J. C., Greist, J. H., & Swiontkowski, M. (2001). Comparison of interactive voice response and written self-administered patient surveys for clinical research. Orthopedics,24(12), 1155–1157.
20. Bjorner, J. B., Rose, M., Gandek, B., Stone, A. A., Junghaenel, D. U., & Ware, J. E, Jr. (2014). Method of administration of PROMIS scales did not significantly impact score level, reliability, or validity. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,67(1), 108–113.