Replication and validation of higher order models demonstrated that a summary score for the EORTC QLQ-C30 is robust
Replication and validation of higher order models demonstrated that a summary score for the EORTC QLQ-C30 is robust
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.007
复制
发表时间：
2016-01-01
影响因子：
7.2
通讯作者：
Aaronson, Neil K.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Giesinger, Johannes M.;Kieffer, Jacobien M.;Aaronson, Neil K.
目的：进一步评估欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织(EORTC)生活质量问卷核心30(QLQ-C30)的高阶测量结构，目的是生成一个总分。研究设计和设置：使用预处理的QLQ-C30数据(N=3,282)，对7个先前评估的高阶模型进行验证性因素分析。结果：虽然所有模型都表现出可接受的拟合度，但为了简约起见，我们继续使用从单一高阶因子模型中得出的汇总分数进行有效性和反应性分析。QLQ-C30总分的效度和反应度与原始QLQ-C30总分相当，且在许多情况下优于QLQ-C30总分。结论：我们的研究结果为QLQ-C30产生单一总分的测量模型提供了经验支持。此汇总分数的可用性可以避免在基于此问卷生成的15个结果进行比较时因多项测试而出现的潜在I类错误的问题，并且当总体汇总分数是相关的主要结果时，可以减少使用QLQ-C30问卷进行的与健康相关的生活质量研究的样本量要求。(C)2016年提交人。由爱思唯尔公司出版。
Objective: To further evaluate the higher order measurement structure of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30), with the aim of generating a summary score.Study Design and Setting: Using pretreatment QLQ-C30 data (N = 3,282), we conducted confirmatory factor analyses to test seven previously evaluated higher order models. We compared the summary score(s) derived from the best performing higher order model with the original QLQ-C30 scale scores, using tumor stage, performance status, and change over time (N = 244) as grouping variables.Results: Although all models showed acceptable fit, we continued in the interest of parsimony with known-groups validity and responsiveness analyses using a summary score derived from the single higher order factor model. The validity and responsiveness of this QLQ-C30 summary score was equal to, and in many cases superior to the original, underlying QLQ-C30 scale scores.Conclusion: Our results provide empirical support for a measurement model for the QLQ-C30 yielding a single summary score. The availability of this summary score can avoid problems with potential type I errors that arise because of multiple testing when making comparisons based on the 15 outcomes generated by this questionnaire and may reduce sample size requirements for health-related quality of life studies using the QLQ-C30 questionnaire when an overall summary score is a relevant primary outcome. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.