Cargando…
Validation of the English and Chinese versions of the Quick-FLIC quality of life questionnaire
A useful measure of quality of life should be easy and quick to complete. Recently, we reported the development and validation of a shortened Chinese version of the Functional Living Index – Cancer (FLIC), which we called the Quick-FLIC. In the present study of 327 English-speaking and 221 Chinese-s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2005
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2361884/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15700037 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602399 |
_version_ | 1782153324074631168 |
---|---|
author | Cheung, Y-B Khoo, K-S Thumboo, J Ng, G-Y Wee, J Goh, C |
author_facet | Cheung, Y-B Khoo, K-S Thumboo, J Ng, G-Y Wee, J Goh, C |
author_sort | Cheung, Y-B |
collection | PubMed |
description | A useful measure of quality of life should be easy and quick to complete. Recently, we reported the development and validation of a shortened Chinese version of the Functional Living Index – Cancer (FLIC), which we called the Quick-FLIC. In the present study of 327 English-speaking and 221 Chinese-speaking cancer patients, we validated the English version of the Quick-FLIC and further assessed the Chinese version. The 11 Quick-FLIC items were administered alongside the 11 remaining items of the full FLIC, but there appeared to be little context effect. Validity of the English version of the Quick-FLIC was attested by its strong correlation with two other measures of quality of life, and its ability to detect differences between patients with different performance status and treatment status (each P<0.001). Its internal consistency (alpha=0.86) and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation=0.76) were also satisfactory. The measure was responsive to changes in performance status (P<0.001). The Chinese version showed similar characteristics. The Quick-FLIC behaved in ways that are highly comparable with the FLIC, even though the Quick-FLIC comprised only 11 items whereas the FLIC comprised 22. Further research is required to see whether the use of shorter instruments can improve data quality and response rates, but the fact that shorter instruments place less burden on the patients is itself inherently important. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2361884 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2005 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-23618842009-09-10 Validation of the English and Chinese versions of the Quick-FLIC quality of life questionnaire Cheung, Y-B Khoo, K-S Thumboo, J Ng, G-Y Wee, J Goh, C Br J Cancer Clinical Study A useful measure of quality of life should be easy and quick to complete. Recently, we reported the development and validation of a shortened Chinese version of the Functional Living Index – Cancer (FLIC), which we called the Quick-FLIC. In the present study of 327 English-speaking and 221 Chinese-speaking cancer patients, we validated the English version of the Quick-FLIC and further assessed the Chinese version. The 11 Quick-FLIC items were administered alongside the 11 remaining items of the full FLIC, but there appeared to be little context effect. Validity of the English version of the Quick-FLIC was attested by its strong correlation with two other measures of quality of life, and its ability to detect differences between patients with different performance status and treatment status (each P<0.001). Its internal consistency (alpha=0.86) and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation=0.76) were also satisfactory. The measure was responsive to changes in performance status (P<0.001). The Chinese version showed similar characteristics. The Quick-FLIC behaved in ways that are highly comparable with the FLIC, even though the Quick-FLIC comprised only 11 items whereas the FLIC comprised 22. Further research is required to see whether the use of shorter instruments can improve data quality and response rates, but the fact that shorter instruments place less burden on the patients is itself inherently important. Nature Publishing Group 2005-02-28 2005-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC2361884/ /pubmed/15700037 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602399 Text en Copyright © 2005 Cancer Research UK https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Study Cheung, Y-B Khoo, K-S Thumboo, J Ng, G-Y Wee, J Goh, C Validation of the English and Chinese versions of the Quick-FLIC quality of life questionnaire |
title | Validation of the English and Chinese versions of the Quick-FLIC quality of life questionnaire |
title_full | Validation of the English and Chinese versions of the Quick-FLIC quality of life questionnaire |
title_fullStr | Validation of the English and Chinese versions of the Quick-FLIC quality of life questionnaire |
title_full_unstemmed | Validation of the English and Chinese versions of the Quick-FLIC quality of life questionnaire |
title_short | Validation of the English and Chinese versions of the Quick-FLIC quality of life questionnaire |
title_sort | validation of the english and chinese versions of the quick-flic quality of life questionnaire |
topic | Clinical Study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2361884/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15700037 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602399 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cheungyb validationoftheenglishandchineseversionsofthequickflicqualityoflifequestionnaire AT khooks validationoftheenglishandchineseversionsofthequickflicqualityoflifequestionnaire AT thumbooj validationoftheenglishandchineseversionsofthequickflicqualityoflifequestionnaire AT nggy validationoftheenglishandchineseversionsofthequickflicqualityoflifequestionnaire AT weej validationoftheenglishandchineseversionsofthequickflicqualityoflifequestionnaire AT gohc validationoftheenglishandchineseversionsofthequickflicqualityoflifequestionnaire |