Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

01-12-2014

Assessing the invariance of a culturally competent multi-lingual unmet needs survey for immigrant and Australian-born cancer patients: a Rasch analysis

Auteurs: J. A. McGrane, P. N. Butow, M. Sze, M. Eisenbruch, D. Goldstein, M. T. King

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 10/2014

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess the invariance of a culturally competent multi-lingual unmet needs survey.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted among immigrants of Arabic-, Chinese- and Greek-speaking backgrounds, and Anglo-Australian-born controls, recruited through Cancer Registries (n = 591) and oncology clinics (n = 900). The survey included four subscales, with newly developed items addressing unmet need in culturally competent health information and patient support (CCHIPS), and items adapted from existing questionnaires addressing physical and daily living (PDL), sexuality (SEX) and survivorship (SURV) unmet need. The survey was translated into Arabic, Chinese and Greek. Rasch analysis was carried out on the four domains.

Results

Whilst many items were mistargeted to less prevalent areas of unmet need, causing substantial floor effects in person estimates, reliability indices were acceptable. The CCHIPS domain showed differential item functioning (DIF) for cultural background and language, and the PDL domain showed DIF for treatment phase and gender. The results for SEX and SURV domains were limited by floor effects and missing responses. All domains showed adequate fit to the model after DIF was resolved and a small number of items were deleted.

Conclusions

The study highlights the intricacies in designing a culturally competent survey that can be applied to culturally and linguistically diverse groups across different treatment contexts. Overall, the results demonstrate that this survey is somewhat invariant with respect to these factors. Future refinements are suggested to enhance the survey’s cultural competence and general validity.
vorige artikel Assessing the validity of single-item life satisfaction measures: results from three large samples
volgende artikel Reliability and validity of a survey to measure bowel function and quality of life in long-term rectal cancer survivors
Literatuur
1.
Bonevski, B., Sanson-Fisher, R., Girgis, A., Burton, L., Cook, P., et al. (2000). Evaluation of an instrument to assess the needs of patients with cancer. Supportive care review group. Cancer, 88(1), 217–225.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Au, A., Lam, W. W., Kwong, A., Suen, D., Tsang, J., et al. (2011). Validation of the Chinese version of the short-form Supportive Care Needs Survey Questionnaire (SCNS-SF34-C). Psycho-Oncology, 20(12), 1292–1300.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Boyes, A., Girgis, A., & Lecathelinais, C. (2009). Brief assessment of adult cancer patients’ perceived needs: Development and validation of the 34-item Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-SF34). Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 15(4), 602–606.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Hodgkinson, K., Butow, P., Hunt, G. E., Pendlebury, S., Hobbs, K. M., et al. (2007). The development and evaluation of a measure to assess cancer survivors’ unmet supportive care needs: The CaSUN (Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs measure). Psycho-Oncology, 16(9), 796–804.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Chu, K. C., Miller, B. A., & Springfield, S. A. (2007). Measures of racial/ethnic health disparities in cancer mortality rates and the influence of socioeconomic status. Journal of the National Medical Association, 99(10), 1092–1104.PubMedCentralPubMed
6.
Colagiuri, B., King, M. T., Butow, P. N., McGrane, J. A., Luckett, T., et al. (2012). A comparison of the FACT-G and the Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS) in women with ovarian cancer: Unidimensionality of constructs. Quality of Life Research, 21(5), 887–897.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Butow, P. N., Sze, M., Duggal-Beri, P., Mikhail, M., Eisenbruch, M., et al. (2011). From inside the bubble: Migrants’ perceptions of communication with the cancer team. Supportive Care in Cancer, 19(2), 281–290.CrossRef
8.
Goldstein, D., Thewes, B., & Butow, P. (2002). Communicating in a multicultural society. II: Greek community attitudes towards cancer in Australia. Internal Medicine Journal, 32(7), 289–296.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Moore, R., & Butow, P. (2005). Culture and oncology: Impact of context effects. In D. Speigel (Ed.), Cancer, communication and culture. New York: Kluwer Academic.
10.
Ali, N. S., Khalil, H. Z., & Yousef, W. (1993). A comparison of American and Egyptian cancer patients’ attitudes and unmet needs. Cancer Nursing, 16(3), 193–203.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Guthrie, B. (2005). Bridging health care disparities: Addressing unmet needs of women of color. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing, 34(3), 385.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Custers, J. W., Hoijtink, H., van der Net, J., & Helders, P. J. (2000). Cultural differences in functional status measurement: Analyses of person fit according to the Rasch model. Quality of Life Research, 9(5), 571–578.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Tennant, A., Penta, M., Tesio, L., Grimby, G., Thonnard, J.-L., et al. (2004). Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: The PRO-ESOR project. Medical Care, 42(1), I37–I48.PubMed
14.
Pallant, J. F., & Tennant, A. (2007). An introduction to the Rasch measurement model: An example using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 46, 1–18.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Andrich, D. (1988). Rasch models for measurement. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications Inc.
16.
Pagano, I. S., & Gotay, C. C. (2005). Ethnic differential item functioning in the assessment of quality of life in cancer patients. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 3(1), 60.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
17.
Teresi, J. A., & Fleishman, J. A. (2007). Differential item functioning and health assessment. Quality of Life Research, 16(1), 33–42.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Tesio, L., & Tennant, A. (2005). Psychometric properties of the mini-mental state examination in patients with acquired brain injury in Turkey. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 37, 306–311.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Geyh, S., Fellinghauer, B., Kirchberger, I., & Post, M. (2010). Cross-cultural validity of four quality of life scales in persons with spinal cord injury. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8, 94.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
20.
Choi, Y., Mericle, A., & Harachi, T. W. (2006). Using Rasch analysis to test the cross-cultural item equivalence of the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist across Vietnamese and Cambodian immigrant mothers. Journal of Applied Measurement, 7(1), 16.PubMedCentralPubMed
21.
Baranik, L. E., Meade, A. W., Lakey, C. E., Lance, C. E., Hu, C., et al. (2008). Examining the differential item functioning of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale across eight countries. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(7), 1867–1904.CrossRef
22.
Zumbo, B. D. (2003). Does item-level DIF manifest itself in scale-level analyses? Implications for translating language tests. Language Testing, 20(2), 136–147.CrossRef
23.
Salzberger, T., Sinkovics, R. R., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. (1999). Data equivalence in cross-cultural research: A comparison of classical test theory and latent trait theory based approaches. Australasian Marketing Journal, 7(2), 23–38.CrossRef
24.
Butow, P. N., Bell, M., Aldridge, L. J., Sze, M., Eisenbruch, M., et al. (2013). Unmet needs in immigrant cancer survivors: A cross-sectional population based study. Supportive Care in Cancer, 21, 2509–2520.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Bell, M. L., Butow, P. N., and Goldstein, D. (2013). Informatively missing quality of life and unmet needs sex data for immigrant and Anglo-Australian cancer patients and survivors. Quality of Life Research, 22(10), 1–4.
26.
Schuman, H. (1966). The random probe: A technique for evaluating the validity of closed questions. American Sociological Review, 31(2), 218–222.
27.
Andrich, D., Sheridan, B., & Luo, G. (2010). Rasch models for measurement: RUMM2030. Perth, Western Australia: RUMM Laboratory.
28.
Chen, W.-H., Lenderking, W., Jin, Y., Wyrwich, K., Gelhorn, H., et al. (2014). Is Rasch model analysis applicable in small sample size pilot studies for assessing item characteristics? An example using PROMIS pain behavior item bank data. Quality of Life Research, 23(2), 485–493.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Linacre, M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7, 328.
30.
Marais, I., & Andrich, D. (2008). Effects of varying magnitude and patterns of response dependence in the unidimensional Rasch model. Journal of Applied Measurement, 9(2), 105–124.PubMed
31.
Andrich, D., & Hagquist, C. (2012). Real and artificial differential item functioning. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 37(3), 387–416.CrossRef
32.
Marais, I., & Andrich, D. (2008). Formalising dimension and response violations of local independence in the unidimensional Rasch model. Journal of Applied Measurement, 9(3), 200–215.PubMed
33.
Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., Graeff, A., et al. (2007). The use of differential item functioning analyses to identify cultural differences in responses to the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research, 16(1), 115–129.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Andrich, D. (2005). The Rasch model explained. In S. Alagumalai, D. Durtis, & N. Hungi (Eds.), Applied Rasch measurement: A book of exemplars (pp. 308–328). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
35.
McKenna, S. P., Wilburn, J., Thorsen, H., & Brodersen, J. (2012). Adapting patient-reported outcome measures for use in new languages and cultures. In K. B. Christensen, S. Kreiner, & M. Mesbah (Eds.), Rasch models in health (pp. 303–315). London, UK: Wiley.
36.
Petersen, M. A., Groenvold, M., Bjorner, J. B., Aaronson, N., Conroy, T., et al. (2003). Use of differential item functioning analysis to assess the equivalence of translations of a questionnaire. Quality of Life Research, 12(4), 373–385.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Gershon, R., Cella, D., Dineen, K., Rosenbloom, S., Peterman, A., et al. (2003). Item response theory and health-related quality of life in cancer. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 3(6), 783–791.PubMedCrossRef
38.
ABS, Australian Social Trends (4102.0). A.B.o. Statistics, Editor 2010, AGPS: Canberra.
39.
Hobart, J. C. (2003). Rating scales for neurologists. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 74, 22–26.CrossRef
40.
Flynn, K. E., Jeffery, D. D., Keefe, F. J., Porter, L. S., Shelby, R. A., et al. (2011). Sexual functioning along the cancer continuum: Focus group results from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS®). Psycho-Oncology, 20(4), 378–386.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
41.
Borsboom, D. (2006). When does measurement invariance matter? Commentary. Medical Care, 44(11), S176–S181.PubMedCrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Assessing the invariance of a culturally competent multi-lingual unmet needs survey for immigrant and Australian-born cancer patients: a Rasch analysis
Auteurs
J. A. McGrane
P. N. Butow
M. Sze
M. Eisenbruch
D. Goldstein
M. T. King
Publicatiedatum
01-12-2014
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 10/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0717-5

Andere artikelen Uitgave 10/2014

A comparison of three methods of assessing differential item functioning (DIF) in the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale: ordinal logistic regression, Rasch analysis and the Mantel chi-square procedure

  • Brief Communication

Longitudinal quality of life data: a comparison of continuous and ordinal approaches

Equating the HBSC Family Affluence Scale across survey years: a method to account for item parameter drift using the Rasch model

Conceptualizing disability in US national surveys: application of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework

Cancer-related fatigue in breast cancer patients: factor mixture models with continuous non-normal distributions

The relationships between demographic and clinical characteristics and quality of life during and after radiotherapy: in women with breast cancer