Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Quality of Life Research
Published in: Quality of Life Research 10/2012

Open Access 01-12-2012

Assessing measurement invariance of a health-related quality-of-life questionnaire in radiotherapy patients

Authors: Bellinda L. King-Kallimanis, Claartje L. ter Hoeven, Hanneke C. de Haes, Ellen M. Smets, Caro C. E. Koning, Frans J. Oort

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 10/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

If the assumption of measurement invariance is not tested, we cannot be sure whether differences observed are due to true differences in health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL), or are measurement artifacts. We aim to investigate this assumption in a sample of heterogeneous cancer patients, focusing on whether age, sex, previous treatment for cancer, and information regarding treatment preferences result in biased HRQoL scores.

Methods

155 cancer patients who were about to begin their first session of radiotherapy were included. HRQoL was measured using the EORTC QLQ-C30. Structural equation modeling was applied to assess whether there was a violation of the assumption of invariance.

Results

A satisfactory single construct (Functioning HRQoL) measurement model was found and two violations of invariance were identified. Irrespective of patients’ Functioning HRQoL, older patients reported worse physical functioning and patients who had received treatment prior to radiotherapy reported worse emotional functioning than we would otherwise expect.

Conclusions

In the present study, accounting for measurement bias lead to a substantial improvement in the overall fit of the model. By ignoring the bias, we would have concluded that the model fit was unsatisfactory. The findings underline the importance of investigating measurement invariance in scales designed for heterogeneous samples.
Literature
1.
Mellenbergh, G. J. (1989). Item bias and item response theory. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(2), 127–143.CrossRef
2.
Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor-analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525–543.CrossRef
3.
Reker, G. T., & Fry, P. S. (2003). Factor structure and invariance of personal meaning measures in cohorts of younger and older adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(5), 977–993.CrossRef
4.
Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., et al. (1993). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85(5), 365–376.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Sprangers, M. A. G., Groenvold, M., Arraras, J. I., Franklin, J., te Velde, A., Muller, M., et al. (1996). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: First results from a three-country field study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 14(10), 2756–2768.PubMed
6.
Bergman, B., Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Kaasa, S., & Sullivan, M. (1994). The Eortc Qlq-Lc13—A modular supplement to the EORTC core quality-of-life questionnaire (Qlq-C30) for use in lung-cancer clinical-trials. European Journal of Cancer, 30A(5), 635–642.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Gotay, C. C., Blaine, D., Haynes, S. N., Holup, J., & Pagano, I. S. (2002). Assessment of quality of life in a multicultural cancer patient population. Psychological Assessment, 14(4), 439–450.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Snyder, C. F., Garrett-Mayer, E., Brahmer, J. R., Carducci, M. A., Pili, R., Stearns, V., et al. (2008). Symptoms, supportive care needs, and function in cancer patients: How are they related? Quality of Life Research, 17(5), 665–677.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., de Graeff, A., Groenvold, M., et al. (2010). Differential item functioning (DIF) analyses of health-related quality of life instruments using logistic regression. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8, 81.PubMed
10.
Petersen, M. A., Groenvold, M., Bjorner, J. B., Aaronson, N., Conroy, T., Cull, A., et al. (2003). Use of differential item functioning analysis to assess the equivalence of translations of a questionnaire. Quality of Life Research, 12(4), 373–385.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Bottomley, A., Aaronson, N. K., de Graeff, A., Groenvold, M., et al. (2006). Comparing translations of the EORTC QLQ-C30 using differential item functioning analyses. Quality of Life Research, 15(6), 1103–1115.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Sprangers, M. A. G., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999). Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: A theoretical model. Social Science and Medicine, 48(11), 1507–1515.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Rees, C. E., & Bath, P. A. (2000). The information needs and source preferences of women with breast cancer and their family members: A review of the literature published between 1988 and 1998. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31(4), 833–841.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Stark, S., Chernyshenko, E. S., & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1292–1306.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Oort, F. J. (1998). Simulation study of item bias detection with restricted factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisiplinary Journal, 5(2), 107–124.CrossRef
16.
Barendse, M. T., Oort, F. J., & Garst, G. J. A. (2010). Using restricted factor analysis with latent moderated structures to detect uniform and nonuniform measurement bias; a simulation study. Asta-Advances in Statistical Analysis, 94, 117–127.CrossRef
17.
Muthén, B. O. (1989). Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Psychometrika, 54(4), 557–585.CrossRef
18.
ter Hoeven, C. L., Zandbelt, L. C., Fransen, S., de Haes, H., Oort, F., Geijsen, D., Koning, C., & Smets, E. (2010). Measuring cancer patients’ reasons for their information preference: Construction of the considerations concerning cancer information (CCCI) questionnaire. Psycho Oncology. doi:10.​1002/​pon.​184.
19.
Zeguers, M., de Haes, H. C., Zandbelt, L. C., ter Hoeven, C. L., Franssen, S. J., Geijsen, D. D., Koning, C. C., & Smets, E. M. (2010). The information needs of new radiotherapy patients: How to measure? Do they want to know everything? And if not, why? International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. doi:10.​1016/​j.​ijrobp.​2010.​09.​032.
20.
Cassileth, B. R., Zupkis, R. V., Sutton-Smith, K., & March, V. (1980). Information and participation preferences among cancer patients. Annals of Internal Medicine, 92(6), 832–836.PubMed
21.
MxGui. (2010). [computer program]. Version 32. Richmond, VA: VCU.
22.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258.CrossRef
23.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidel, L. S. (2006). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Needham Heights, MA, USA: Allyn & Bacon, Inc.
24.
Saris, W. E., Satorra, A., & Sörbom, D. (1987). The detection and correction of specification errors in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 17, 105–129.CrossRef
25.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum associates.
26.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
27.
Hoogland, J. J., & Boomsma, A. (1998). Robustness studies in covariance structure modeling—An overview and a meta-analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 26, 329–367.CrossRef
28.
Fayers, P. M., & Hand, D. J. (1997). Factor analysis, causal indicators and quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 6(2), 139–150.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Ware, J. E., Snow, K. K., Kosinski, M., & Gandek, B. (1993). SF-36 health survey manual and interpretation guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.
30.
King-Kallimanis, B. L., Oort, F. J., Visser, M. R., & Sprangers, M. A. G. (2009). Structural equation modeling of health-related quality-of-life data illustrates the measurement and conceptual perspectives on response shift. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(11), 1157–1164.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Johnson, C., Fitzsimmons, D., Gilbert, J., Arrarras, J. I., Hammerlid, E., Bredart, A., et al. (2010). Development of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire module for older people with cancer: The EORTC QLQ-ELD15. European Journal of Cancer, 46(12), 2242–2252.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Vohs, K. D., & Heatherton, T. F. (2000). Self-regulatory failure: A resource-depletion approach. Psychological Science, 11(3), 249–254.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Muraven, M., Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Self-control as limited resource: Regulatory depletion patterns. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 774–789.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1252–1265.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Kaasa, S., Bjordal, K., Aaronson, N., Moum, T., Wist, E., Hagen, S., et al. (1995). The EORTC core quality of life questionnaire (QLQ-C30): Validity and reliability when analysed with patients treated with palliative radiotherapy. European Journal of Cancer, 31A(13–14), 2260–2263.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Slotman, B. J., Mauer, M. E., Bottomley, A., Faivre-Finn, C., Kramer, G. W. P. M., Rankin, E. M., et al. (2009). Prophylactic cranial irradiation in extensive disease small-cell lung cancer: Short-term health-related quality of life and patient reported symptoms-results of an international phase III randomized controlled trial by the EORTC radiation oncology and lung cancer groups. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 27(1), 78–84.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Mosconi, P., Apolone, G., Barni, S., Secondino, S., Sbanotto, A., & Filiberti, A. (2002). Quality of life in breast and colon cancer long-term survivors: An assessment with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and SF-36 questionnaires. Tumori, 88(2), 110–116.PubMed
38.
Greimel, E. R., Winter, R., Kapp, K. S., & Haas, J. (2009). Quality of life and sexual functioning after cervical cancer treatment: A long-term follow-up study. Psycho-Oncology, 18(5), 476–482.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Assessing measurement invariance of a health-related quality-of-life questionnaire in radiotherapy patients
Authors
Bellinda L. King-Kallimanis
Claartje L. ter Hoeven
Hanneke C. de Haes
Ellen M. Smets
Caro C. E. Koning
Frans J. Oort
Publication date
01-12-2012
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Quality of Life Research / Issue 10/2012
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-0094-2

Other articles of this Issue 10/2012

Quality of Life Research 10/2012 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Adaptation and cognitive testing of physical activity measures for use with young, school-aged children and their parents

Review

Health-related quality of life among children with mental disorders: a systematic review

OriginalPaper

The effect of weight loss on changes in health-related quality of life among overweight and obese women with urinary incontinence

Erratum

Erratum to: From well-being to positive mental health: conceptualization and qualitative development of an instrument in Singapore

OriginalPaper

Growing up with cystic fibrosis: achievement, life satisfaction, and mental health

Brief Communication

The impact of functional constipation on quality of life of middle-aged Black Americans: a prospective case–control study