Search

Purpose: Patient-reported outcomes should ideally be adapted to the individual patient while maintaining comparability of scores across patients. This is achievable using computerized adaptive testing (CAT). The aim here was to develop an item bank for CAT measurement of the pain domain as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire.Methods: The development process consisted of four steps: (1) literature search, (2) formulation of new items and expert evaluations, (3) pretesting and (4) field-testing and psychometric analyses for the final selection of items.Results: In step 1, we identified 337 pain items from the literature. Twenty-nine new items fitting the QLQ-C30 item style were formulated in step 2 that were reduced to 26 items by expert evaluations. Based on interviews with 31 patients from Denmark, France and the UK, the list was further reduced to 21 items in step 3. In phase 4, responses were obtained from 1103 cancer patients from five countries. Psychometric evaluations showed that 16 items could be retained in a unidimensional item bank. Evaluations indicated that use of the CAT measure may reduce sample size requirements with 15-25% compared to using the QLQ-C30 pain scale.Conclusions: We have established an item bank of 16 items suitable for CAT measurement of pain. While being backward compatible with the QLQ-C30, the new item bank will significantly improve measurement precision of pain. We recommend initiating CAT measurement by screening for pain using the two original QLQ-C30 pain items. The EORTC pain CAT is currently available for "experimental" purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We performed a comprehensive assessment of the psychometrics of the "Psychosocial Aspects in Hereditary Cancer" (PAHC) questionnaire in French, German and Spanish. Methods: Women consecutively approached in Cancer Genetic Clinics completed the PAHC, distress and satisfaction questionnaires at pre‐testing (T1) and after test result disclosure (T2). In addition to standard psychometric attributes, we assessed the PAHC ability to respond to change (i.e. improvement or deterioration from T1 to T2) in perceived difficulties and computed minimal important differences (MID) in PAHC scores as compared with self‐reported needs for additional counselling. Results: Of 738 eligible counselees, 214 (90%) in France (Paris), 301 (92%) in Germany (Cologne) and 133 (77%) in Spain (Barcelona) completed the PAHC. A six‐factor revised PAHC model yielded acceptable CFA goodness‐of‐fit indexes and good all scales internal consistencies. PAHC scales demonstrated expected conceptual differences with distress and satisfaction with counselling. Different levels of psychosocial difficulties were evidenced between counselees' subgroups and over time (p‐values <.05). MID estimates ranged from 8 to 15 for improvement and 9 to 21 for deterioration. Conclusion: The PAHC French, German and Spanish versions are reliable and valid for evaluating the psychosocial difficulties of women at high BC risk attending genetic clinics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Impact of Cancer version 2 (IOCv2) was designed to assess the physical and psychosocial health experience of cancer survivors through its positive and negative impacts. Although the IOCv2 is available in English and Dutch, it has not yet been validated for use in French-speaking populations. The current study was undertaken to provide a comprehensive assessment of the reliability and validity of the French language version of the IOCv2 in a sample of breast cancer survivors., Methods: An adapted French version of the IOCv2 as well as demographic and medical information were completed by 243 women to validate the factor structure divergent/divergent validities and reliability. Concurrent validity was assessed by correlating the IOCv2 scales with measures from the SF-12, PostTraumatic Growth Inventory and Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory., Results: The French version of the IOCv2 supports the structure of the original version, with four positive impact dimensions and four negative impact dimensions. This result was suggested by the good fit of the confirmatory factor analysis and the adequate reliability revealed by Cronbach's alpha coefficients and other psychometric indices. The concurrent validity analysis revealed patterns of association between IOCv2 scale scores and other measures. Unlike the original version, a structure with a Positive Impact domain consisting in the IOCv2 positive dimensions and a Negative Impact domain consisting in the negative ones has not been clearly evidenced in this study. The limited practical use of the conditional dimensions Employment Concerns and Relationship Concerns, whether the patient is partnered or not, did not make possible to provide evidence of validity and reliability of these dimensions as the subsets of sample to work with were not large enough. The scores of these conditional dimensions have to be used with full knowledge of the facts of this limitation of the study., Conclusions: Integrating IOCv2 into studies will contribute to evaluate the psychosocial health experience of the growing population of cancer survivors, enabling better understanding of the multi-dimensional impact of cancer.