Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36617606›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2023

PROMIS-29 and EORTC QLQ-C30: an empirical investigation towards a common conception of health.

Claudia Hartmann, Felix Fischer, Christoph P Klapproth, Robert Röhle, Matthias Rose, Maria M Karsten

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. 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.

Claudia HartmannDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, Center of Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. claudia.hartmann@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8298-5557
Felix FischerDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, Center of Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9693-6676
Christoph P KlapprothDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, Center of Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6057-5920
Robert RöhleDepartment of Gynecology With Breast Center, Charité University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8130-6524
Matthias RoseDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine, Center of Internal Medicine and Dermatology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7842-8256
Maria M KarstenDepartment of Gynecology With Breast Center, Charité University Hospital Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7587-7550

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measured via patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is a key component in clinical trials and increasingly used in clinical routine worldwide. Two PRO measures (PROMs) that share the same definition of health and report outcomes on a comparable T-metric anchored to general population samples are the PROMIS-29 and the EORTC QLQ-C30. In this study, we investigate the empirical agreement of these underlying concepts.

methodsWe collected PROMIS-29 and EORTC QLQ-C30 data from 1,478 female patients at a breast cancer outpatient centre. We calculated descriptive statistics and correlations between the subscales of both instruments. We performed exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in randomly split subsamples in order to assess the underlying psychometric structure of both instruments.

resultsThe cohort (mean age = 47.4, ± 14.49) reported comparable mean HRQOL scores between the corresponding subscales of both instruments similar to general population reference values. Correlation between the corresponding subscales of both instruments ranged between 0.59 (Social Role) and 0.78 (Physical Functioning). Both an exploratory and a theoretically driven confirmatory factor analysis provided further support for conceptual agreement of the scales.

conclusionEORTC QLQ-C30 and PROMIS-29 showed similar scores and satisfactory agreement in conceptional and statistical analysis. This suggests that the underlying conceptualization of health is reasonably close. Hence, the development of score transformation algorithms or calibration of both instruments on common scales could prospectively increase the comparability of clinical and research PRO data collected with either instrument.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsQuality of LifeAlgorithmsCalibrationFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesComparable outcomeConceptualization of healthEORTC QLQ-C30Health-related quality of lifePROMIS-29

Identifiers

PMID36617606
PMCPMC9992045

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.