Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34286416›Full record

Trial reportQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2022

Equivalence testing of a newly developed interviewer-led telephone script for the EORTC QLQ-C30.

Claire Piccinin, Madeline Pe, Dagmara Kuliś, James W Shaw, Sally J Wheelwright, Andrew Bottomley

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 54% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Assessing oral and dental health-related quality of life in head and neck cancer patients at 1, 5, and 10 years: a comparison of the EORTC QLQ43, FACT H&N, and the Orthognathic-QLQ questionnaires.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Article
  2. The EORTC QLQ43 and FACT H&N questionnaires of quality of life at 1 and 5 years after treatment and dental care in head and neck cancer patients: a pilot study.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Claire PiccininQuality of Life Department, EORTC, Brussels, Belgium. claire.piccinin@eortc.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3918-1174
Madeline PeQuality of Life Department, EORTC, Brussels, Belgium.
Dagmara KuliśQuality of Life Department, EORTC, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2289-2113
James W ShawPatient-Reported Outcomes Assessment, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Lawrenceville, NJ, USA.
Sally J WheelwrightMacmillan Survivorship Research Group, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0657-2483
Andrew BottomleyQuality of Life Department, EORTC, Brussels, Belgium.
European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer · BEEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer · NLMacmillan Cancer Support · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life-Core Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) is a widely used generic self-report measure of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for cancer patients. However, no validated voice script for interviewer-led telephone administration was previously available. The aim of this study was to develop a voice script for interviewer administration via telephone.

methodsFollowing guidelines from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) PRO Mixed Modes Good Research Practices Task Force, a randomised cross-over equivalence study, including cognitive debriefing, was conducted to assess equivalence between paper and telephone administration modes. Assuming an expected intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.70 and a minimally acceptable level of 0.50, a sample size of 63 was required.

resultsCognitive interviews with five cancer patients found the voice script to be clear and understandable. Due to a protocol deviation in the first wave of testing, only 26 patients were available for analyses. A second wave of recruitment was conducted, adding 37 patients (n = 63; mean age 55.48; 65.1% female). Total ICCs for mode comparison ranged from 0.72 (nausea and vomiting, 95% CI 0.48-0.86) to 0.90 (global health status/QoL, 95% CI 0.80-0.95; pain, 95% CI 0.79-0.95; constipation, 95% CI 0.80-0.95). For paper first administration, all ICCs were above 0.70, except nausea and vomiting (ICC 0.55; 95% CI 0.24-0.76) and financial difficulties (ICC 0.60; 95% CI 0.31-0.79). For phone first administration, all ICCs were above 0.70.

conclusionsThe equivalence testing results support the voice script's validity for administration of the QLQ-C30 via telephone.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsQuality of LifeFemaleHealth StatusHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesTelephoneAdministration modeCore cancer symptomsEORTC QLQ-C30Equivalence testingHealth-related quality of lifePatient-reported outcomesRemote questionnaire administrationVoice script

Identifiers

PMID34286416
PMCPMC8921039
OpenAlexW3184090557

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.