"It ain't over till the fat lady sings" : A response to Cameron N. McIntosh, improving the evaluation of model fit in confirmatory factor analysis

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Effects of mode of administration (MOA) on the measurement properties of the EORTC QLQ-C30: a randomized study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>While modern electronic data collection methods (e.g., computer touch-screen or web-based) hold much promise, most current studies continue to make use of more traditional data collection techniques, including paper-and-pencil administration and telephone interviews. The present randomized trial investigated the measurement properties of the EORTC QLQ-C30 under three different modes of administration (MOA's).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A heterogeneous sample of 314 cancer patients undergoing treatment at a specialized treatment center in Amsterdam were randomized to one of three MOA's for the QLQ-C30: paper-and-pencil at home via the mail, telephone interview, and paper-and-pencil at the hospital clinic. Group differences in internal consistency reliabilities (Cronbach's alpha coefficient) for the scale scores were compared. Differences in mean scale scores were also compared by means of ANOVA, with adjustment for potential confounders.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Only one statistically significant, yet minor, difference in Cronbach's alpha between the MOA groups was observed for the Role Functioning scale (all 3 alphas >0.80). Significant differences in group means -after adjustment- were found for the Emotional Functioning (EF) scale. Patients completing the written questionnaire at home had significantly lower levels of EF as compared to those interviewed via the telephone; EF scores of those completing the questionnaire at the clinic fell in-between those of the other two groups. These differences, however, were small in magnitude.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>MOA had little effect on the reliability or the mean scores of the EORTC QLQ-C30, with the possible exception of the EF scale.</p

Literature Review of Methods to Translate Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaires for Use in Multinational Clinical Trials

AbstractObjectivesWe conducted a literature review to respond to regulatory concerns about the quality of translated patient-reported outcome questionnaires. Our main objective was to answer two questions: What do the methods have in common (and how do they differ)? Is there evidence of the superiority of one method over another?MethodsWe identified 891 references by searching MEDLINE, Embase, and the Mapi Research Trust's database with “quality-of-life,” “questionnaires,” “health status indicators” matched with “translating,” “translation issues,” “cross-cultural research,” and “cross-cultural comparison.” Articles were included if they proposed, compared or criticized translation methods.ResultsForty-five articles met our inclusion criteria: 23 representing 17 sets of methods, and 22 reviews. Most articles recommend a multistep approach involving a centralized review process. Nevertheless, each group proposes its own sequence of translation events and weights each step differently. There is evidence demonstrating that a rigorous and a multistep procedure leads to better translations. Nevertheless, there is no empirical evidence in favor of one specific method.ConclusionsWe need more empirical research on translation methodologies. Several points emerge from this review. First, producing high-quality translations is labor-intensive. Second, the availability of standardized guidelines and centralized review procedures improves the efficiency of the production of translations. Although we did not find evidence in favor of one method, we strongly advise researchers to adopt a multistep approach. In line with the recent Food and Drug Administration recommendations, we developed a checklist summarizing the steps used for translations, which can be used to evaluate the rigor of the applied methodologies

Exceptions to the rule of informed consent for research with an intervention

Background In specific situations it may be necessary to make an exception to the general rule of informed consent for scientific research with an intervention. Earlier reviews only described subsets of arguments for exceptions to waive consent. Methods Here, we provide a more extensive literature review of possible exceptions to the rule of informed consent and the accompanying arguments based on literature from 1997 onwards, using both Pubmed and PsycINFO in our search strategy. Results We identified three main categories of arguments for the acceptability of a consent waiver: data validity and quality, major practical problems, and distress or confusion of participants. Approval by a medical ethical review board always needs to be obtained. Further, we provide examples of specific conditions under which consent waiving might be allowed, such as additional privacy protection measures. Conclusions The reasons legitimized by the authors of the papers in this overview can be used by researchers to form their own opinion about requesting an exception to the rule of informed consent for their own study. Importantly, rules and guidelines applicable in their country, institute and research field should be followed. Moreover, researchers should also take the conditions under which they feel an exception is legitimized under consideration. After discussions with relevant stakeholders, a formal request should be sent to an IRB

Cognitive behavioral therapy and physical exercise for climacteric symptoms in breast cancer patients experiencing treatment-induced menopause: design of a multicenter trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Premature menopause is a major concern of younger women undergoing adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Hormone replacement therapy is contraindicated in women with a history of breast cancer. Non-hormonal medications show a range of bothersome side-effects. There is growing evidence that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and physical exercise can have a positive impact on symptoms in naturally occurring menopause. The objective of this study is to investigate the efficacy of these interventions among women with breast cancer experiencing treatment-induced menopause.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>In a randomized, controlled, multicenter trial, we are evaluating the effectiveness of CBT/relaxation, of physical exercise and of these two program elements combined, in reducing menopausal symptoms, improving sexual functioning, reducing emotional distress, and in improving the health-related quality of life of younger breast cancer patients who experience treatment-induced menopause. 325 breast cancer patients (aged < 50) are being recruited from hospitals in the Amsterdam region, and randomly allocated to one of the three treatment groups or a 'waiting list' control group. Self-administered questionnaires are completed by the patients at baseline, and at 12 weeks (T1) and 6 months (T2) post-study entry. Upon completion of the study, women assigned to the control group will be given the choice of undergoing either the CBT or physical exercise program.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Cognitive behavioral therapy and physical exercise are potentially useful treatments among women with breast cancer undergoing treatment-induced, premature menopause. For these patients, hormonal and non-hormonal therapies are contraindicated or have a range of bothersome side-effects. Hence, research into these interventions is needed, before dissemination and implementation in the current health care system can take place.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR1165) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00582244).</p

Health-related quality of life in adult patients with brain metastases after stereotactic radiosurgery:A systematic, narrative review

Purpose A growing number of patients with brain metastases (BM) are being treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), and the importance of evaluating the impact of SRS on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in these patients has been increasingly acknowledged. This systematic review summarizes the current knowledge about the HRQoL of patients with BM after SRS. Methods We searched EMBASE, Medline Ovid, Web-of-Science, the Cochrane Database, PsycINFO Ovid, and Google Scholar up to November 15, 2018. Studies in patients with BM in which HRQoL was assessed before and after SRS and analyzed over time were included. Studies including populations of several types of brain cancer and/or several types of treatments were included if the results for patients with BM and treatment with SRS alone were described separately. Results Out of 3638 published articles, 9 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included. In 4 out of 7 studies on group results, overall HRQoL of patients with BM remained stable after SRS. In small study samples of longer-term survivors, overall HRQoL remained stable up to 12 months post-SRS. Contradictory results were reported for physical and general/global HRQoL, which might be explained by the different questionnaires that were used. Conclusions In general, SRS does not have significant negative effects on patients’ overall HRQoL over time. Future research is needed to analyze different aspects of HRQoL, differences in individual changes in HRQoL after SRS, and factors that influence these changes. These studies should take into account several methodological issues as discussed in this review

Withdrawal from Genetic Counselling for Cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A substantial minority of individuals who initially apply for genetic counselling for breast/ovarian cancer withdraw at an early stage from the counselling process. This study investigated the self-reported reasons for early withdrawal and the factors associated significantly with such withdrawal.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Self-report questionnaires were mailed to 83 women who had applied for genetic counselling for breast/ovarian cancer but who subsequently withdrew from the counselling process (the "withdrawers"). A comparison group of 105 women who had completed the genetic counselling (the "attendees") received a similar questionnaire. The questionnaire assessed sociodemographic characteristics, reasons for applying for genetic counselling, general distress (MHI-5), cancer-specific distress (IES), and cancer worries. For those women who discontinued the counselling, reasons for withdrawal were also assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The primary reasons given for withdrawing from counselling were difficulties in anticipating the consequences of genetic counselling (28%), and worries about being unable to adequately cope with an unfavourable test result (20%). Compared to the attendees, the withdrawers were significantly younger, more frequently asymptomatic, more often the first and only member of the family to apply for counselling, and less worried about cancer. Current levels of cancer-specific distress and general distress were comparable between the two groups.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Younger women, those without a history of cancer, and those who are first in their family to apply are more likely to withdraw prematurely from genetic counselling for breast/ovarian cancer. These withdrawers have no elevated levels of distress. However, a substantial percentage of individuals discontinue counselling due to concerns about their (in)ability to cope with a possible unfavourable test outcome. This suggests that greater attention should be paid to ways of coping with test results during the very first contact with the clinic.</p

Deriving a preference-based measure for cancer using the EORTC QLQ-C30 : a confirmatory versus exploratory approach

Background: To derive preference-based measures from various condition-specific descriptive health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures. A general 2-stage method is evolved: 1) an item from each domain of the HRQOL measure is selected to form a health state classification system (HSCS); 2) a sample of health states is valued and an algorithm derived for estimating the utility of all possible health states. The aim of this analysis was to determine whether confirmatory or exploratory factor analysis (CFA, EFA) should be used to derive a cancer-specific utility measure from the EORTC QLQ-C30. Methods: Data were collected with the QLQ-C30v3 from 356 patients receiving palliative radiotherapy for recurrent or metastatic cancer (various primary sites). The dimensional structure of the QLQ-C30 was tested with EFA and CFA, the latter based on a conceptual model (the established domain structure of the QLQ-C30: physical, role, emotional, social and cognitive functioning, plus several symptoms) and clinical considerations (views of both patients and clinicians about issues relevant to HRQOL in cancer). The dimensions determined by each method were then subjected to item response theory, including Rasch analysis. Results: CFA results generally supported the proposed conceptual model, with residual correlations requiring only minor adjustments (namely, introduction of two cross-loadings) to improve model fit (increment χ2(2) = 77.78, p 75% observation at lowest score), 6 exhibited misfit to the Rasch model (fit residual > 2.5), none exhibited disordered item response thresholds, 4 exhibited DIF by gender or cancer site. Upon inspection of the remaining items, three were considered relatively less clinically important than the remaining nine. Conclusions: CFA appears more appropriate than EFA, given the well-established structure of the QLQ-C30 and its clinical relevance. Further, the confirmatory approach produced more interpretable results than the exploratory approach. Other aspects of the general method remain largely the same. The revised method will be applied to a large number of data sets as part of the international and interdisciplinary project to develop a multi-attribute utility instrument for cancer (MAUCa)