ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
Evaluating the use of prior information to individualise start item selection for the EORTC CAT core.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeComputerized adaptive tests (CATs) provide individualised measurement, using score estimates based on the patient’s prior responses to select the next most informative item. However, as no score estimate is available at the outset, the start item is typically not individualised. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) CAT Core covers 15 health-related quality of life (HRQoL) domains. We explored whether scores from one domain could be used to obtain initial score estimates and hence, individualised start items for another domain, thereby improving measurement.
methodsFor each HRQoL domain, we evaluated the ability to predict scores using each of the 14 other domains in a large international sample of cancer patients (N = 10,084). Using simulations, we compared the impact of individualised versus standard fixed start item on CAT measurement precision.
resultsAcross domains, predicted scores were within one standard deviation of the observed score in 72–89% of the assessments (mean = 83%), with predicted-observed correlations ranging 0.31–0.72 (mean = 0.55). The impact of individualised start items varied by domain and score level but typically improved reliability in the initial steps of CATs (first 3 items), particularly for patients with extreme scores.
conclusionCross-domain predictions can be used to generate initial score estimates for individualised start item selection. Simulations suggested that individualised start items lead to improvements in measurement precision, particularly for short CATs (up to 3 items) and patients with extreme scores. Individualised start items based on cross-domain predicted scores is planned to be incorporated into the EORTC CAT Core toolbox.
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.