两种癌症患者生活质量指标的比较:ferans and Powers生活质量指数和欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量问卷C30。

Digant Gupta, James F Grutsch, Christopher G Lis
{"title":"两种癌症患者生活质量指标的比较:ferans and Powers生活质量指数和欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量问卷C30。","authors":"Digant Gupta,&nbsp;James F Grutsch,&nbsp;Christopher G Lis","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health-related quality of life (QoL) in cancer patients cannot be adequately captured with a single instrument. We compared the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index (QLI). We hypothesized that there would be little overlap among their subscales. Baseline QoL data were collected from a consecutive series of 954 cancer patients treated at our center. Data from the two questionnaires were analyzed on a subscale basis using correlation analysis and the Bland-Altman method. The mean and standard deviations of the difference in QoL subscale scores were used to construct 95% limits of agreement among the subscales. Five hundred seventy-nine were females and 375 were males, with a median age of 52 years. There were poor to modest correlations and poor agreement among the subscales of the two instruments. For QLQ-C30 physical and QLI health, the correlation and limits of agreement were 0.6 and -22.2 to 59.8. For QLQ-C30 role and QLI health, the correlation and limits of agreement were 0.6 and -47.3 to 61.5. For QLQ-C30 social and QLI social, the correlation and limits of agreement were 0.2 and -78.2 to 50.2. Consequently, these instruments measure unrelated aspects of QoL and can give different conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":87409,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Society for Integrative Oncology","volume":"6 1","pages":"13-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of two quality of life instruments for cancer patients: the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index and the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30.\",\"authors\":\"Digant Gupta,&nbsp;James F Grutsch,&nbsp;Christopher G Lis\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Health-related quality of life (QoL) in cancer patients cannot be adequately captured with a single instrument. We compared the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index (QLI). We hypothesized that there would be little overlap among their subscales. Baseline QoL data were collected from a consecutive series of 954 cancer patients treated at our center. Data from the two questionnaires were analyzed on a subscale basis using correlation analysis and the Bland-Altman method. The mean and standard deviations of the difference in QoL subscale scores were used to construct 95% limits of agreement among the subscales. Five hundred seventy-nine were females and 375 were males, with a median age of 52 years. There were poor to modest correlations and poor agreement among the subscales of the two instruments. For QLQ-C30 physical and QLI health, the correlation and limits of agreement were 0.6 and -22.2 to 59.8. For QLQ-C30 role and QLI health, the correlation and limits of agreement were 0.6 and -47.3 to 61.5. For QLQ-C30 social and QLI social, the correlation and limits of agreement were 0.2 and -78.2 to 50.2. Consequently, these instruments measure unrelated aspects of QoL and can give different conclusions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87409,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Society for Integrative Oncology\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"13-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Society for Integrative Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Society for Integrative Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

癌症患者的健康相关生活质量(QoL)不能用单一仪器充分捕获。我们比较了欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量调查问卷(QLQ-C30)和费朗斯和鲍尔斯生活质量指数(QLI)。我们假设它们的子尺度之间几乎没有重叠。基线生活质量数据收集自连续954例在本中心接受治疗的癌症患者。采用相关分析和Bland-Altman方法对两份问卷的数据进行亚量表分析。使用生活质量子量表得分差异的均值和标准差来构建子量表之间95%的一致性界限。其中女性579人,男性375人,平均年龄52岁。两种工具的子量表之间存在较差的相关性和较差的一致性。qqq - c30体质与QLI健康的相关性和一致性限分别为0.6和-22.2 ~ 59.8。qqq - c30作用与QLI健康的相关系数为0.6,一致性限为-47.3 ~ 61.5。qq - c30 social与QLI social的相关系数为0.2,一致性限为-78.2 ~ 50.2。因此,这些工具测量的是生活质量中不相关的方面,并可能给出不同的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of two quality of life instruments for cancer patients: the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index and the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30.

Health-related quality of life (QoL) in cancer patients cannot be adequately captured with a single instrument. We compared the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index (QLI). We hypothesized that there would be little overlap among their subscales. Baseline QoL data were collected from a consecutive series of 954 cancer patients treated at our center. Data from the two questionnaires were analyzed on a subscale basis using correlation analysis and the Bland-Altman method. The mean and standard deviations of the difference in QoL subscale scores were used to construct 95% limits of agreement among the subscales. Five hundred seventy-nine were females and 375 were males, with a median age of 52 years. There were poor to modest correlations and poor agreement among the subscales of the two instruments. For QLQ-C30 physical and QLI health, the correlation and limits of agreement were 0.6 and -22.2 to 59.8. For QLQ-C30 role and QLI health, the correlation and limits of agreement were 0.6 and -47.3 to 61.5. For QLQ-C30 social and QLI social, the correlation and limits of agreement were 0.2 and -78.2 to 50.2. Consequently, these instruments measure unrelated aspects of QoL and can give different conclusions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信