Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation
-
Comparative Study
Comparative validation of the WOMAC osteoarthritis and Lequesne algofunctional indices in Greek patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis.
To comparatively evaluate the reliability and validity of the Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) and the Lequesne algofunctional indices in Greek patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA). ⋯ Our findings, in samples of knee and hip OA patients, indicate that the WOMAC index demonstrates better internal consistency reliability than the Lequesne counterpart, as well as equivalent test-retest reliability and construct validity.
-
The main purpose of this study was to describe the cultural adaptation of a Persian version of the Insomnia Severity Index and to evaluate its psychometric properties by testing internal consistency, construct validity, discriminant validity, and concurrent validity. ⋯ Cross-cultural adaptation was successful, and the ISI-P has good psychometric properties. Using the ISI-P is recommended to evaluate insomnia in research and clinical settings in Persian-speaking people.
-
To estimate Swedish experience-based value sets for EQ-5D health states using general population health survey data. ⋯ A value set for EQ-5D health states based on Swedish valuations has been lacking. Several authors have recently advocated the normative standpoint of using experience-based values. Guidelines of economic evaluation for reimbursement decisions in Sweden recommend the use of experience-based values for QALY calculations. Our results that anxiety/depression had the greatest impact on both TTO and VAS values underline the importance of mental health for individuals' overall HRQoL. Using population surveys is in line with recent thinking on valuing health states and could reduce some of the focusing effects potentially appearing in hypothetical valuation studies.
-
Multicenter Study
Cognitive interviewing of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).
The National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) is a library of question items that enables patient reporting of adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials. This study contributes content validity evidence of the PRO-CTCAE by incorporating cancer patient input of the relevance and comprehensiveness of the item library. ⋯ This study provides evidence confirming comprehension of the US English language versions of items in the PRO-CTCAE library for measuring symptomatic AEs from the patient perspective within the context of cancer treatment. Several minor changes were made to the items to improve item clarity, comprehension, and ease of response judgment. This study helps to establish the content validity of PRO-CTCAE items for patient reporting of AEs during cancer treatment.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Testing the measurement equivalence of paper and interactive voice response system versions of the EORTC QLQ-C30.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the measurement equivalence of an interactive voice response system (IVRS) version and the original paper-based version of the EORTC QLQ-C30. ⋯ This analysis provides evidence that the scores obtained from the IVRS version of the QLQ-C30 are equivalent to those obtained with the original paper version except for the insomnia and appetite loss items.