Top

Quality of Life Research

Published in:

Open Access 01-03-2022 | Nausea

Equivalence testing of a newly developed interviewer-led telephone script for the EORTC QLQ-C30

Authors: Claire Piccinin, Madeline Pe, Dagmara Kuliś, James W. Shaw, Sally J. Wheelwright, Andrew Bottomley

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 3/2022

Abstract

Purpose

The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life-Core Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) is a widely used generic self-report measure of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for cancer patients. However, no validated voice script for interviewer-led telephone administration was previously available. The aim of this study was to develop a voice script for interviewer administration via telephone.

Methods

Following guidelines from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) PRO Mixed Modes Good Research Practices Task Force, a randomised cross-over equivalence study, including cognitive debriefing, was conducted to assess equivalence between paper and telephone administration modes. Assuming an expected intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.70 and a minimally acceptable level of 0.50, a sample size of 63 was required.

Results

Cognitive interviews with five cancer patients found the voice script to be clear and understandable. Due to a protocol deviation in the first wave of testing, only 26 patients were available for analyses. A second wave of recruitment was conducted, adding 37 patients (n = 63; mean age 55.48; 65.1% female). Total ICCs for mode comparison ranged from 0.72 (nausea and vomiting, 95% CI 0.48–0.86) to 0.90 (global health status/QoL, 95% CI 0.80–0.95; pain, 95% CI 0.79–0.95; constipation, 95% CI 0.80–0.95). For paper first administration, all ICCs were above 0.70, except nausea and vomiting (ICC 0.55; 95% CI 0.24–0.76) and financial difficulties (ICC 0.60; 95% CI 0.31–0.79). For phone first administration, all ICCs were above 0.70.

Conclusions

The equivalence testing results support the voice script’s validity for administration of the QLQ-C30 via telephone.

Available only for authorised users

Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., Filiberti, A., Flechtner, H., Fleishman, S. B., Haes, J. C. J. M. D., Kaasa, S., Klee, M., Osoba, D., Razavi, D., Rofe, P. B., Schraub, S., Sneeuw, K., Sullivan, M., & Takeda, F. (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. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/85.5.365CrossRefPubMed

Mierzynska, J., Piccinin, C., Pe, M., Martinelli, F., Gotay, C., Coens, C., Mauer, M., Eggermont, A., Groenvold, M., Bjordal, K., Reijneveld, J., Velikova, G., & Bottomley, A. (2019). Prognostic value of patient-reported outcomes from international randomised clinical trials on cancer: A systematic review. The Lancet Oncology, 20, e685–e698. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30656-4CrossRefPubMed

Aaronson, N. K., Bullinger, M., & Ahmedzai, S. (1988). A modular approach to quality-of-life assessment in cancer clinical trials. Recent Results in Cancer Research, 111, 231–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-83419-6_27CrossRefPubMed

Reeve, B. B., Mitchell, S. A., Dueck, A. C., Basch, E., Cella, D., Reilly, C. M., Minasian, L. M., Denicoff, A. M., O’Mara, A. M., Fisch, M. J., Chauhan, C., Aaronson, N. K., Coens, C., & Bruner, D. W. (2014). Recommended patient-reported core set of symptoms to measure in adult cancer treatment trials. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju129CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Gundy, C. M., Fayers, P. M., Groenvold, M., Petersen, M. A., Scott, N. W., Sprangers, M. A. G., Velikova, G., & Aaronson, N. K. (2012). Comparing higher order models for the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-0082-6CrossRefPubMed

Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., De Graeff, A., Groenvold, M., Koller, M., Petersen, M. A., & Sprangers, M. A. G. (2007). The use of differential item functioning analyses to identify cultural differences in responses to the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-9120-1CrossRefPubMed

Gotay, C. C., Kawamoto, C. T., Bottomley, A., & Efficace, F. (2008). The prognostic significance of patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 26(8), 1355–1363.CrossRef

Wintner, L. M., Sztankay, M., Aaronson, N., Bottomley, A., Giesinger, J. M., Groenvold, M., Petersen, M. A., van de Poll-Franse, L., Velikova, G., Verdonck-de Leeuw, I., & Holzner, B. (2016). The use of EORTC measures in daily clinical practice—A synopsis of a newly developed manual. European Journal of Cancer, 68, 73–81.CrossRef

Quinten, C., Coens, C., Mauer, M., Comte, S., Sprangers, M. A., Cleeland, C., Osoba, D., Bjordal, K., & Bottomley, A. (2009). Baseline quality of life as a prognostic indicator of survival: A meta-analysis of individual patient data from EORTC clinical trials. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70200-1CrossRefPubMed

10.

Kuliś, D., Holzner, B., Koller, M., Ruyskart, P., Itani, A., Williams, P., & Bottomley, A. (2018). Guidance on the implementation and management of EORTC quality of life instruments in electronic applications. Brussels: EORTC.

11.

Petersen, M. A., Aaronson, N. K., Arraras, J. I., Chie, W. C., Conroy, T., Costantini, A., Dirven, L., Fayers, P., Gamper, E. M., Giesinger, J. M., Habets, E. J. J., Hammerlid, E., Helbostad, J., Hjermstad, M. J., Holzner, B., Johnson, C., Kemmler, G., King, M. T., Kaasa, S., … Groenvold, M. (2018). The EORTC CAT Core—The computer adaptive version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. European Journal of Cancer, 100, 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2018.04.016CrossRefPubMed

12.

Coons, S. J., Gwaltney, C. J., Hays, R. D., Lundy, J. J., Sloan, J. A., Revicki, D. A., Lenderking, W. R., Cella, D., & Basch, E. (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 Heal, 12, 419–429. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00470.xCrossRef

13.

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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0454-1CrossRefPubMed

14.

Lundy, J. J., Coons, S. J., & Aaronson, N. K. (2015). Test-retest reliability of an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) version of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Patient, 8, 165–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-014-0071-2CrossRefPubMed

15.

Bennett, A. V., Dueck, A. C., Mitchell, S. A., Mendoza, T. R., Reeve, B. B., Atkinson, T. M., Castro, K. M., Denicoff, A., Rogak, L. J., Harness, J. K., Bearden, J. D., Bryant, D., Siegel, R. D., Schrag, D., Basch, E., Heon, N., Shaw, M., Ryan, S., Stark, L. P., … Alexander, K. (2016). Mode equivalence and acceptability of tablet computer-, interactive voice response system-, and paper-based administration of the U.S. National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 14, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-016-0426-6CrossRef

16.

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 Heal. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00231.xCrossRef

17.

Muehlhausen, W., Doll, H., Quadri, N., Fordham, B., O’Donohoe, P., Dogar, N., & Wild, D. J. (2015). Equivalence of electronic and paper administration of patient-reported outcome measures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies conducted between 2007 and 2013. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-015-0362-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Ramachandran, S., Lundy, J. J., & Coons, S. J. (2008). Testing the measurement equivalence of paper and touch-screen versions of the EQ-5D visual analog scale (EQ VAS). Quality of Life Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9384-8CrossRefPubMed

19.

Eremenco, S., Coons, S. J., Paty, J., Coyne, K., Bennett, A. V., & McEntegart, D. (2014). PRO data collection in clinical trials using mixed modes: Report of the ISPOR PRO mixed modes good research practices task force. Value Heal, 17, 501–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2014.06.005CrossRef

20.

Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420CrossRefPubMed

21.

Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric Methods (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

22.

Portney, L., & Watkins, M. (2000). Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

23.

Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 213–220.CrossRef

24.

Fleiss, J. L., & Cohen, J. (1973). The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 33, 613–619. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447303300309CrossRef

25.

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. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1998.16.1.139CrossRefPubMed

26.

Hjermstad, M. J., Fossa, S. D., Bjordal, K., & Kaasa, S. (1995). Test/retest study of the European Organization for Research and treatment of cancer core quality-of-life questionnaire. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1995.13.5.1249CrossRefPubMed

Title: Equivalence testing of a newly developed interviewer-led telephone script for the EORTC QLQ-C30
Authors: Claire Piccinin
Madeline Pe
Dagmara Kuliś
James W. Shaw
Sally J. Wheelwright
Andrew Bottomley
Publication date: 01-03-2022
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Keywords: Nausea
Vomiting
Published in: Quality of Life Research / Issue 3/2022
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02955-6

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Equivalence testing of a newly developed interviewer-led telephone script for the EORTC QLQ-C30

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2022

Quality of life in urologic cancer patients: importance of and satisfaction with specific quality of life domains

Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hyperhidrosis: a systematic review

Comparing the use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical studies in Europe in 2008 and 2018: a literature review

Health-related quality of life deviations from population norms in patients with lumbar radiculopathy: associations with pain, pain cognitions, and endogenous nociceptive modulation

Health-related quality of life among breast cancer patients compared to cancer survivors and age-matched women in the general population in Vietnam

Inequality and heterogeneity in health-related quality of life: findings based on a large sample of cross-sectional EQ-5D-5L data from the Swedish general population