Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Measurement accuracy in assessing patient’s quality of life: to weight or not to weight domains of quality of life

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures typically do not incorporate patients’ preferences for domains such as physical, emotional, functional and social/family well-being, which may compromise precision.

Method

A forced-choice domain-preference measure was developed to assess the importance of HRQOL domains. About 194 cancer patients completed the domain-preference measure, along with measures of HRQOL, coping, adjustment, and life satisfaction.

Results

Patients ranked emotional well-being as most important and the loss of social-family well-being as the most difficult to do without. A weighting algorithm revealed no advantage to incorporating individuals’ domain preferences in HRQOL assessment; however, preliminary evidence suggested that HRQOL measurement may be more accurate in predicting outcomes for individuals with no distinct domain preferences than those with distinct preference profiles.

Conclusion

This study provides preliminary evidence for the validity of current measures of HRQOL, which may inherently take into account patients’ domain preferences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jemal, A., Siegel, R., Ward, E., Murray, T., Xu, J., & Thun, M. (2007). Cancer statistics, 2007. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 57, 43–66. doi:10.3322/canjclin.57.1.43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. American Cancer Society. (2009). Cancer facts and Figs 2009. Atlanta: American Cancer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cella, D., & Tulksy, D. (1993). Quality of life in cancer: Definition, purpose, and method of measurement. Cancer Investigation, 11, 327–336. doi:10.3109/07357909309024860.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Soni, M., & Cella, D. (2002). Quality of life and symptom measures in oncology: An overview. The American Journal of Managed Care, 8, S560–S573.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Smith, A., Velikova, G., Wright, E., Lynch, P., & Selby, P. (2006). Computer-assisted questionnaires may facilitate quality-of-life (QOL) data: At a cost. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 991–1000. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Guyatt, G., Feeny, D., & Patrick, D. (1993). Measuring health-related quality of life. Annals of Internal Medicine, 118, 622–629.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Nanda, U., & Andresen, E. (1998). Health-related quality of life. A guide for the health professional. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 21, 179–215. doi:10.1177/016327879802100204.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Velikova, G., Booth, L., Smith, A., Brown, P., Lynch, P., Brown, J., et al. (2004). Measuring quality of life in oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22, 714–724. doi:10.1200/JCO.2004.06.078.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Oldridge, N. (1996). Outcomes measurement: Health-related quality of life. Assistive Technology, 8, 82–93.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gelber, R., Goldhirsch, A., & Cavalli, F. (1991). Quality-of-life-adjusted evaluation of adjuvant therapies for operable breast cancer. Annals of Internal Medicine, 114, 621–628.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Tamburini, M. (2001). Health-related quality of life measures in cancer. Annals of Oncology, 12, S7–S10. doi:10.1023/A:1013078511828.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Varricchio, C. (2006). Measurement issues in quality of life assessments. Oncology Nursing Forum, 33, S13–S21. doi:10.1188/06.ONF.S1.13-21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cella, D., et al. (1993). The functional assessment of cancer therapy scale: Development and validation of the general measure. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 11, 570–579.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Cheung, Y., Khoo, K., Wong, Z., See, H., Toh, H., Epstein, R., et al. (2003). Quick-FLIC: A short questionnaire for assessing quality of life in cancer patients. Acta Oncologica, 42, 36–42. doi:10.1080/0891060310002212.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Degi, C. (2006). An analysis of the effectiveness of psycho-oncological interventions in view of quality of life and survival outcomes of cancer patients. Psychiatria Hungarica, 21, 138–146.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Browne, J., O’Boyle, C., McGee, H., McDonald, N., & Joyce, C. (1997). Development of a direct weighting procedure for quality of life domains. Quality of Life Research, 6, 301–309. doi:10.1023/A:1018423124390.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Muldoon, M., Barger, S., Flory, J., & Manuck, S. (1998). What are quality of life measurements measuring? British Medical Journal, 316, 542–545.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ruta, D., Garratt, A., Leng, M., Russell, I., & MacDonald, L. (1994). A new approach to the measurement of quality of life: The patient generated index (PGI). Medical Care, 32, 1109–1126. doi:10.1097/00005650-199411000-00004.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. O’Boyle, C., Browne, J., Hickey, A., McGee, H., & Joyce, C. (1995). Schedule for the evaluation of individual quality of life (SEIQoL): A direct weighting procedure for quality of life domains (SEIQoLDW). Dublin, UK: Administration Manual; Department of Psychology, Royal College of Surgeons.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gorbatenko-Roth, K., Levin, I., Altmaier, E., & Doebbeling, B. (2001). Accuracy of health-related quality of life assessment: What is the benefit of incorporating patients’ preferences for domain functioning? Health Psychology, 20, 136–140. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.20.2.136.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Osoba, D., Hsu, M., Copley-Merriman, C., Coombs, J., Johnson, F., Hauber, B., et al. (2006). Stated preferences of patients with cancer for health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) domains during treatment. Quality of Life Research, 15, 273–283. doi:10.1007/s11136-005-0580-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Merluzzi, T. V., Nairn, R. C., Hegde, K., Martinez Sanchez, M. A., & Dunn, L. (2001). Self-efficacy for coping with cancer: Revision of the cancer behavior inventory (version 2.0). Psycho-Oncology, 10, 206–217. doi:10.1002/pon.511.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Derogatis, L. R., & Derogatis, M. F. (1990). The psychological adjustment to illness scale: Administration scoring, and procedures manual. Towson, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cole, D. A., Howard, G. S., & Maxwell, S. E. (1981). Effects of mono- versus multiple operationalization in construct validity efforts. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 395–405. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.49.3.395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dobrez, D., Cella, D., Pickard, S., Lai, J., & Nickolov, A. (2007). Estimation of patient preference-based utility weights from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General. Value in Health, 10(4), 266–272. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00181.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, 46556, USA

    Errol J. Philip

  2. University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA

    Thomas V. Merluzzi

  3. University of North Carolina, Charlotte, NC, USA

    Amy Peterman

  4. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Lisa B. Cronk

Authors
  1. Errol J. Philip
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas V. Merluzzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amy Peterman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lisa B. Cronk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Errol J. Philip.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Philip, E.J., Merluzzi, T.V., Peterman, A. et al. Measurement accuracy in assessing patient’s quality of life: to weight or not to weight domains of quality of life. Qual Life Res 18, 775–782 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9492-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9492-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation