Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31485913›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2019

German value sets for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a cancer-specific utility instrument based on the EORTC QLQ-C30.

Georg Kemmler, Eva Gamper, Virginie Nerich, Richard Norman, Rosalie Viney, Bernhard Holzner, Madeleine King, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. United Kingdom value set for the functional assessment of cancer therapy eight dimension (FACT-8D) preference-based quality of life instrument.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  9. Comparing EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 utilities with QLU-C10D utilities in hematologic cancer patients.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Developing a patient-based utility value set for the EORTC QLU-C10D using the OPUF method in Chinese cancer patients.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Norwegian and Swedish value sets for the EORTC QLU-C10D utility instrument.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  16. The EORTC QLU-C10D is a valid cancer-specific preference-based measure for cost-utility and health technology assessment in the Netherlands.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024
    Article
  17. Chinese utility weights for the EORTC cancer-specific utility instrument QLU-C10D.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Georg KemmlerDivision of Psychiatry I, Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. georg.kemmler@tirol-kliniken.at.
Eva GamperDivision of Psychiatry II, Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Virginie NerichDepartment of Pharmacy, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France.
Richard NormanSchool of Public Health, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.
Rosalie VineyCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Bernhard HolznerDivision of Psychiatry II, Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Madeleine KingSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group
Innsbruck Medical University · ATCurtin University · AUInserm · FRThe University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 002/2014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe EORTC QLU-C10D is a new multi-attribute utility instrument derived from the EORTC QLQ-C30, a widely used cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire. It covers ten dimensions: physical, role, social, emotional functioning, pain, fatigue, sleep, appetite, nausea, and bowel problems. To allow national health attitudes to be reflected, country-specific valuations are being performed by collaboration of the Multi-Attribute Utility Cancer (MAUCa) Consortium and the EORTC. The purpose of this paper is to provide German value sets (utility weights) for the QLU-C10D.

methodsValuations were run in a web-based setting in two general population samples of approximately 2000 adults in total. As the German version of the QLQ-C30 is presently undergoing a revision of the wording of one response category, valuations for both the current and the new version were performed (Germany 1 and 2). Utilities were elicited using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Data were analyzed by conditional logistic regression and mixed logits.

resultsCompletion rates were 88.3% (1002/1135) and 90.4% (1016/1124) for Germany 1 and Germany 2 valuations, respectively. Dimensions with the largest impact on utility weights were, in this order: physical functioning, pain, role functioning, social functioning and nausea (same ordering for both German versions). Several violations of the logical ordering of levels were observed for Germany 1; this was largely improved for Germany 2.

conclusionThis study established German utility weights for the cancer-specific utility instrument QLU-C10D.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFatigueFemaleGermanyHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedNauseaNeoplasmsPainQuality of LifeDiscrete choice experimentEORTCGermanyQLQ-C30QLU-C10DUtility weights

Identifiers

PMID31485913
PMCPMC6863792
OpenAlexW2971765818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.