Cargando…
Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey
BACKGROUND: The European Organization for research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) scales are scored on a 4-point response scale, ranging from not at all to very much. Previous studies have shown that the German translation of the response option quite a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8501673/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34625074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01866-x |
_version_ | 1784580734589075456 |
---|---|
author | Koller, Michael Müller, Karolina Nolte, Sandra Schmidt, Heike Harvey, Christina Mölle, Ulrike Boehm, Andreas Engeler, Daniel Metzger, Jürg Sztankay, Monika Holzner, Bernhard Groenvold, Mogens Kuliś, Dagmara Bottomley, Andrew |
author_facet | Koller, Michael Müller, Karolina Nolte, Sandra Schmidt, Heike Harvey, Christina Mölle, Ulrike Boehm, Andreas Engeler, Daniel Metzger, Jürg Sztankay, Monika Holzner, Bernhard Groenvold, Mogens Kuliś, Dagmara Bottomley, Andrew |
author_sort | Koller, Michael |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The European Organization for research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) scales are scored on a 4-point response scale, ranging from not at all to very much. Previous studies have shown that the German translation of the response option quite a bit as mäßig violates interval scale assumptions, and that ziemlich is a more appropriate translation. The present studies investigated differences between the two questionnaire versions. METHODS: The first study employed a balanced cross-over design and included 450 patients with different types of cancer from three German-speaking countries. The second study was a representative survey in Germany including 2033 respondents. The main analyses included compared the ziemlich and mäßig version of the questionnaire using analyses of covariance adjusted for sex, age, and health burden. RESULTS: In accordance with our hypothesis, the adjusted summary score was lower in the mäßig than in the ziemlich version; Study 1: − 4.5 (95% CI − 7.8 to − 1.3), p = 0.006, Study 2: − 3.1 (95% CI − 4.6 to − 1.5), p < 0.001. In both studies, this effect was pronounced in respondents with a higher health burden; Study 1: − 6.8 (95% CI − 12.2 to − 1.4), p = 0.013; Study 2: − 4.5 (95% CI − 7.3 to − 1.7), p = 0.002. CONCLUSIONS: We found subtle but consistent differences between the two questionnaire versions. We recommend to use the optimized response option for the EORTC QLQ-C30 as well as for all other German modules. Trial registration: The study was retrospectively registered on the German Registry for Clinical Studies (reference number DRKS00012759, 04th August 2017, https://www.drks.de/DRKS00012759). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12955-021-01866-x. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8501673 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85016732021-10-20 Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey Koller, Michael Müller, Karolina Nolte, Sandra Schmidt, Heike Harvey, Christina Mölle, Ulrike Boehm, Andreas Engeler, Daniel Metzger, Jürg Sztankay, Monika Holzner, Bernhard Groenvold, Mogens Kuliś, Dagmara Bottomley, Andrew Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: The European Organization for research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) scales are scored on a 4-point response scale, ranging from not at all to very much. Previous studies have shown that the German translation of the response option quite a bit as mäßig violates interval scale assumptions, and that ziemlich is a more appropriate translation. The present studies investigated differences between the two questionnaire versions. METHODS: The first study employed a balanced cross-over design and included 450 patients with different types of cancer from three German-speaking countries. The second study was a representative survey in Germany including 2033 respondents. The main analyses included compared the ziemlich and mäßig version of the questionnaire using analyses of covariance adjusted for sex, age, and health burden. RESULTS: In accordance with our hypothesis, the adjusted summary score was lower in the mäßig than in the ziemlich version; Study 1: − 4.5 (95% CI − 7.8 to − 1.3), p = 0.006, Study 2: − 3.1 (95% CI − 4.6 to − 1.5), p < 0.001. In both studies, this effect was pronounced in respondents with a higher health burden; Study 1: − 6.8 (95% CI − 12.2 to − 1.4), p = 0.013; Study 2: − 4.5 (95% CI − 7.3 to − 1.7), p = 0.002. CONCLUSIONS: We found subtle but consistent differences between the two questionnaire versions. We recommend to use the optimized response option for the EORTC QLQ-C30 as well as for all other German modules. Trial registration: The study was retrospectively registered on the German Registry for Clinical Studies (reference number DRKS00012759, 04th August 2017, https://www.drks.de/DRKS00012759). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12955-021-01866-x. BioMed Central 2021-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8501673/ /pubmed/34625074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01866-x Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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 licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence 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 licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Koller, Michael Müller, Karolina Nolte, Sandra Schmidt, Heike Harvey, Christina Mölle, Ulrike Boehm, Andreas Engeler, Daniel Metzger, Jürg Sztankay, Monika Holzner, Bernhard Groenvold, Mogens Kuliś, Dagmara Bottomley, Andrew Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey |
title | Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey |
title_full | Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey |
title_fullStr | Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey |
title_full_unstemmed | Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey |
title_short | Investigating the response scale of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in German cancer patients and a population survey |
title_sort | investigating the response scale of the eortc qlq-c30 in german cancer patients and a population survey |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8501673/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34625074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01866-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kollermichael investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT mullerkarolina investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT noltesandra investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT schmidtheike investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT harveychristina investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT molleulrike investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT boehmandreas investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT engelerdaniel investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT metzgerjurg investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT sztankaymonika investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT holznerbernhard investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT groenvoldmogens investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT kulisdagmara investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT bottomleyandrew investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey AT investigatingtheresponsescaleoftheeortcqlqc30ingermancancerpatientsandapopulationsurvey |