ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2023
Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 in evaluating the health-related quality of life of elderly patients with cancer.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 in Older Patients With Cancer.International journal of nursing practice · 2026Article
- Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment and Quality of Life Aspects in Patients with Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (HNSCC).Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-ELD14 and measured the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of elderly Japanese patients with cancer aged ≥ 60 and ≥ 70 years.
methodsThe study recruited elderly Japanese patients with cancer aged ≥ 60 (≥ 70) years (n = 1803 [n = 1236]). The EORTC QLQ-ELD14 was evaluated for reliability, validity, responsiveness, and correlations of changes in score between the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 and the EORTC QLQ-C30 before and after the commencement of the COVID-19 pandemic.
resultsIn both age groups, the proportion of missing items was low (< 3%). Cronbach's α was good at ≥ 0.70, except for two of the seven items. All the intraclass coefficient constants were good at ≥ 0.70. The concurrent validity was good but correlation with the EORTC QLQ-C30 was not strong, except for the hypothesis items. Regarding the assessment of responsiveness, only one item ("maintaining purpose") of the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 worsened (- 6.14 ± 29.20, standard response of mean > 0.2) after the commencement of the COVID-19 pandemic. The changes in score between the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 and the "global health status/QOL" and "summary score" of the EORTC QLQ-C30 had moderate-to-high negative correlations for all items, except two. Hypotheses to evaluate construct validity were accepted at 90%, while responsiveness was accepted at 80%.
conclusionThe Japanese version of the EORTC QLQ-ELD14 questionnaire appears to have acceptable reliability, validity, and responsiveness to evaluate HRQOL in elderly Japanese people with cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.