| Autor: |
Eva-Maria Gamper, Caroline Martini, Morten Aagaard Petersen, Irene Virgolini, Bernhard Holzner, Johannes M. Giesinger |
| Jazyk: |
angličtina |
| Rok vydání: |
2019 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, Vol 3, Iss 1, Pp 1-8 (2019) |
| Druh dokumentu: |
article |
| ISSN: |
2509-8020 |
| DOI: |
10.1186/s41687-019-0096-3 |
| Popis: |
Abstract Objective Computer-adaptive tests (CAT) use individualised sets of questions to assess patient-reported health states, whereas static (conventional) questionnaires present the same questions to all patients. CAT has been shown to increase measurement precision and reduce assessment length. In our study, we investigated if patients perceive CAT questions as more appropriate than static questionnaires, a claim that is frequently associated with CAT measures. Methods We compared the static European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) against its corresponding CAT measures focusing on two domains: Physical Functioning (PF) and Emotional Functioning (EF). Cancer patients completed the questionnaires and participated in a cognitive interview to assess how appropriate they perceive the QLQ-C30 and the CAT questions for their current health state. Results Forty-four cancer patients (mean age = 54.6; 56.8% female) were assessed. For the PF domain, patients considered the CAT items more appropriate (p = 0.002) than the QLQ-C30 items (56.8% vs. 15.9%; 27.2% indifferent). For the EF domain, patients were in favour of the QLQ-C30 items (p |
| Databáze: |
Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink