Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The purpose of this study was to determine reproducibility, validity, and responsiveness of the Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) among cancer survivors.
A cohort of 53 cancer survivors completed the WLQ and other questionnaires at baseline, 4-week, and 6-month follow-up. We assessed internal consistency, intraclass correlation coefficient, standard error of measurement, floor- and ceiling effects and compared the WLQ with other constructs. For responsiveness, we assessed the following anchor-based measures: minimal important change (MIC) versus smallest detectable change (SDC) and area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operation characteristic (ROC).
We found sufficient reproducibility at group level but not at individual level as the MIC (4.0) exceeded SDC at group level (3.1) but not at individual level (18.0). There was no indication of systematic bias or proportional bias. The internal consistency and construct validity for the WLQ and its subscales were sufficient or slightly less than sufficient. There was a floor effect for one subscale, but there were no ceiling effects. Responsiveness was sufficient with an AUC of a ROC of 0.65.
The WLQ is reproducible, valid, and responsive for use at group level among cancer survivors but not sufficiently reproducible for use at individual level.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Oostenbrink, J. B., Bouwmans, C. A. M., Koopmanschap, M. A. et al. (2004). Manual for cost studies, methods and standard cost- prices for economic evaluation in health care. [in Dutch: handleiding voor kostenonderzoek, methoden en standaard kostprijzen voor economische evaluaties]. Den Haag, The Netherlands: Board of health care insurance.
Abma, F. I., van der Klink, J. J., Terwee, C. B., Amick Iii, B. C., & Bultmann, U. (2011). Evaluation of the measurement properties of self-reported health-related work-functioning instruments among workers with common mental disorders. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 38(1), 5–18.
Beaton, D. E., Tang, K., Gignac, M. A., Lacaille, D., Badley, E. M., et al. (2010). Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of five at-work productivity measures in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Research (Hoboken), 62(1), 28–37. CrossRef
Ilmarinen, J., & Tuomi, K. (1992). Work ability of aging workers. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 18(Suppl 2), 8–10.
Rutjes, A. W., Reitsma, J. B., Coomarasamy, A., Khan, K. S., & Bossuyt, P. M. (2007). Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is no gold standard. A review of methods. Health Technology Assessment, 11(50), iii, ix–51.
Liang, M. H. (2000). Longitudinal construct validity: Establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Medical Care, 38(9 Suppl), II84–II90.
Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (2008). Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRef
Walker, N., Michaud, K., & Wolfe, F. (2005). Work limitations among working persons with rheumatoid arthritis: Results, reliability, and validity of the work limitations questionnaire in 836 patients. Journal of Rheumatology, 32(6), 1006–1012. PubMed
de Haes, J. C., Olschewski, M., & Fayers, P. et al. (1996). Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients with the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL), a manual. Groningen, The Netherlands: Northeren Centre for Healthcare Research.
- Measurement properties of the Work Limitations Questionnaire were sufficient among cancer survivors
Sietske J. Tamminga
Jos H. A. M. Verbeek
Monique H. W. Frings-Dresen
Angela G. E. M. De Boer
- Springer International Publishing