The Assessment of Burden of ColoRectal Cancer (ABCRC)-tool; a validity and reliability study

Introduction: Follow-up care after treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasingly focused on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and functional outcomes. The Assessment of Burden of ColoRectal Cancer (ABCRC)-tool is developed to measure these outcomes and support patient-oriented care. The tool comprises items assessing burden of disease and lifestyle parameters. It consists of a generic module combined with one of the three CRC specific modules. The objective of this study is to assess the construct validity and reliability of the items of the ABCRC-tool. Methods: Patients who were receiving follow-up care after surgical CRC treatment were invited to complete the ABCRC-tool together with other validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Construct validity was assessed by testing expected correlations between items of the ABCRC-tool and domains of other PROMs and by examining predefined hypotheses regarding differences in subgroups of patients. Patients completed the ABCRC-tool twice, with 8 days apart, to evaluate its reliability. Results: In total, 177 patients participated (64% male) with a mean age of 67 years (range 33–88). The colon, rectum and stoma module were completed by subsequently 89, 53 and 35 patients. Most items correlated as expected with anticipated domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30 or EORTC QLQ-CR29 (all p-values 0.70) for most items, indicating good reliability. Conclusion: The ABCRC-tool is a valid and reliable instrument that is ready for use in a clinical setting to support personalized follow-up care after CRC treatment

Horizontal Mismatch between Employment and Field of Education:Evidence from a Systematic Literature Review

This paper provides a systematic review of the growing literature on the poor match between employees' field degree and the job requirements, also referred to as horizontal mismatch. We identify the different definitions used in the literature and find that each measure of horizontal mismatch yields substantially different incidence rates. We discuss the validity of the different measures and conclude that a more uniform definition of horizontal mismatch is needed. The likelihood of horizontal mismatch is among other things determined by the extent to which employees possess general skills as opposed to occupation-specific skills, and, it appears to be more frequently present among older workers. Compared to well-matched employees, horizontally mismatched workers generally incur a wage penalty, are less satisfied with their jobs, and are more likely to regret their study programme. The ensuing findings offer guidance to prevent horizontal mismatch as well as a roadmap for future research