Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 2/2015

01-04-2015 | Short Communication

Test–Retest Reliability of an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) Version of the EORTC QLQ-C30

Authors: J. Jason Lundy, Stephen Joel Coons, Neil K. Aaronson

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 2/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

The objective of this study was to assess the test–retest reliability of an interactive voice response (IVR) version of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30.

Methods

A convenience sample of outpatient cancer clinic patients (n = 127) was asked to complete the IVR version of the QLQ-C30 twice, 2 days apart. The QLQ-C30 is a 30-item, cancer-specific questionnaire composed of single-item and multi-item scales. The instrument has five functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social), three symptom scales (fatigue, pain, and nausea/vomiting), and a global quality-of-life scale. The remaining single items assess dyspnea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation, diarrhea, and financial problems. The analyses focused on intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), comparing the ICC 95 % lower confidence interval (CI) value with a critical value of 0.70.

Results

The ICCs for the nine multi-item scales were all above 0.69, ranging from 0.698 to 0.926 (ICC 95 % lower CI value range 0.588–0.895). All of the scales were significantly different from our threshold reliability of 0.70, with the exception of the cognitive functioning scale. The ICCs for the six single items ranged from 0.741 to 0.883 (ICC 95 % lower CI value range 0.646–0.835), and three of the six were statistically different from 0.70. The evidence supports the stability of 11 of the 15 scores obtained on the IVR version of the QLQ-C30 upon repeated measurement.

Conclusion

The measurement equivalence of the IVR and paper versions of the QLQ-C30 has been reported elsewhere. This analysis provides evidence demonstrating adequate test–retest reliability of the IVR version for 11 of the QLQ-C30’s 15 scores.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review. Value Health. 2008;11:322–33.CrossRefPubMed Gwaltney CJ, Shields AL, Shiffman S. Equivalence of electronic and paper-and-pencil administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a meta-analytic review. Value Health. 2008;11:322–33.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishman SB, De Haes JC. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365–76.CrossRefPubMed Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishman SB, De Haes JC. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365–76.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Lundy JJ, Coons SJ, Aaronson NK. Testing the measurement equivalence of paper and interactive voice response system versions of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:229–37. Lundy JJ, Coons SJ, Aaronson NK. Testing the measurement equivalence of paper and interactive voice response system versions of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:229–37.
4.
go back to reference Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF. A comparison of two time intervals for test–retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:730–5.CrossRefPubMed Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF. A comparison of two time intervals for test–retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:730–5.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.CrossRef Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86:420–8.CrossRefPubMed Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86:420–8.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1(1):30–46 (Correction, Vol. 1, No. 4, 390). McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1(1):30–46 (Correction, Vol. 1, No. 4, 390).
8.
go back to reference Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
9.
go back to reference Coons SJ, Gwaltney CJ, Hays RD, et al. 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 Health. 2009;12(4):419–29.CrossRefPubMed Coons SJ, Gwaltney CJ, Hays RD, et al. 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 Health. 2009;12(4):419–29.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care. 2003;41:582–92.PubMed Norman GR, Sloan JA, Wyrwich KW. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care. 2003;41:582–92.PubMed
11.
go back to reference Scott NW, Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, Bottomley A, de Graeff A, et al. The EORTC QLQ-C30 reference values manual. Brussels: The EORTC Quality of Life Group; 2008. Scott NW, Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, Bottomley A, de Graeff A, et al. The EORTC QLQ-C30 reference values manual. Brussels: The EORTC Quality of Life Group; 2008.
12.
go back to reference Luckett T, King MT, Butow PN, Oguchi M, Rankin N, Price MA, Hackl NA, Heading G. Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: issues, evidence, and recommendations. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:2179–90.CrossRefPubMed Luckett T, King MT, Butow PN, Oguchi M, Rankin N, Price MA, Hackl NA, Heading G. Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: issues, evidence, and recommendations. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:2179–90.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Hjermstad MJ, Fossa SD, Bjordal K, Kaasa S. Test–retest study of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:1249–54.PubMed Hjermstad MJ, Fossa SD, Bjordal K, Kaasa S. Test–retest study of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer core quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:1249–54.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Velikova G, Wright EP, Smith AB, et al. Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:998–1007.PubMed Velikova G, Wright EP, Smith AB, et al. Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:998–1007.PubMed
15.
go back to reference King M, Winstanley J, Kenny P, Viney R, Zapart S, Boyer M. Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in Australians with early stage non-small cell lung cancer. CHERE Working Paper 2007/13, Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, Sydney. 2007. http://www.chere.uts.edu.au/pdf/wp2007_13.pdf. Accessed 1 Jun 2013. King M, Winstanley J, Kenny P, Viney R, Zapart S, Boyer M. Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-LC13 in Australians with early stage non-small cell lung cancer. CHERE Working Paper 2007/13, Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, Sydney. 2007. http://​www.​chere.​uts.​edu.​au/​pdf/​wp2007_​13.​pdf. Accessed 1 Jun 2013.
16.
go back to reference Uwer L, Rotonda C, Guillemin F, Miny J, Kaminsky MC, et al. Responsiveness of EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR38 and FACT-C quality of life questionnaires in patients with colorectal cancer. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2011;9:70. http://www.hqlo/content/9/1/70. Uwer L, Rotonda C, Guillemin F, Miny J, Kaminsky MC, et al. Responsiveness of EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR38 and FACT-C quality of life questionnaires in patients with colorectal cancer. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2011;9:70. http://​www.​hqlo/​content/​9/​1/​70.
Metadata
Title
Test–Retest Reliability of an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) Version of the EORTC QLQ-C30
Authors
J. Jason Lundy
Stephen Joel Coons
Neil K. Aaronson
Publication date
01-04-2015
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 2/2015
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-014-0071-2

Other articles of this Issue 2/2015

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 2/2015 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

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.

Developed by: Springer Medicine