Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38231438›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2024

Development of standard computerised adaptive test (CAT) settings for the EORTC CAT Core.

Morten Aa Petersen, Hugo Vachon, Johannes M Giesinger, Mogens Groenvold, European Organisation for Research, Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Validation for use in Colombia of the EORTC QLQ-THY34 questionnaire to measure quality of life in patients with thyroid cancer.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    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

5 authors.

Morten Aa PetersenPalliative Care Research Unit, Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine GP, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Bakke 23B, 2400, Copenhagen NV, Denmark. Morten.Aagaard.Petersen@regionh.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3117-632X
Hugo VachonQuality of Life Department, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels, Belgium.
Johannes M GiesingerDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics, and Medical Psychology, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria.
Mogens GroenvoldPalliative Care Research Unit, Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine GP, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Bakke 23B, 2400, Copenhagen NV, Denmark.
European Organisation for Research, Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group

Funding

European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 002/2021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsComputerised adaptive test (CAT) provides individualised patient reported outcome measurement while retaining direct comparability of scores across patients and studies. Optimal CAT measurement requires an appropriate CAT-setting, the set of criteria defining the CAT including start item, item selection criterion, and stop criterion. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) CAT Core allows for assessing the 14 functional and symptom domains covered by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. The aim was to present a general approach for selecting CAT-settings and to use this to develop a portfolio of standard settings for the EORTC CAT Core optimised for different purposes and populations.

methodsUsing simulations, the measurement properties of CATs of different length and precision were evaluated and compared allowing for identifying the most suitable settings. All CATs were initiated with the most informative QLQ-C30 item. For each domain two fixed-length and two fixed-precision standard CATs were selected focusing on efficiency (brief version) and precision (long), respectively.

resultsThe brief fixed-length CATs included 3-5 items each while the long versions included 5-8 items. The fixed-precision CATs aimed for reliability of 0.65-0.95 (brief versions) and 0.85-0.98 (long versions), respectively. Median sample size savings using the CATs compared to the QLQ-C30 scales ranged 20%-31%, although savings varied considerably across the domains.

conclusionThe EORTC CAT Core standard settings simplify selection of relevant and appropriate CATs. The CATs prioritise either brevity and efficiency or precision, but all provide increased measurement precision and hence, reduced sample size requirements compared to the QLQ-C30 scales. The CATs may be used as they are or modified to accommodate specific requirements.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsQuality of LifeHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesCATEORTC QLQ-C30IRTItem bank

Identifiers

PMID38231438
PMCPMC10972921

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.