Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-10-2009

Using cognitive interviews to evaluate items for measuring sexual functioning across cancer populations: improvements and remaining challenges

Auteurs: Alice K. Fortune-Greeley, Kathryn E. Flynn, Diana D. Jeffery, Megan S. Williams, Francis J. Keefe, Bryce B. Reeve, Gordon B. Willis, Kevin P. Weinfurt

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 8/2009

Abstract

Purpose

One goal of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System™ (PROMIS™) is to develop a measure of sexual functioning that broadens the definition of sexual activity and incorporates items that reflect constructs identified as important by patients with cancer. We describe how cognitive interviews improved the quality of the items and discuss remaining challenges to assessing sexual functioning in research with cancer populations.

Methods

We conducted 39 cognitive interviews of patients with cancer and survivors on the topic of sexual experience. Each of the 83 candidate items was seen by 5–24 participants. Participants included both men and women and varied by cancer type, treatment trajectory, race, and literacy level. Significantly revised items were retested in subsequent interviews.

Results

Cognitive interviews provided useful feedback about the relevance, sensitivity, appropriateness, and clarity of the items. Participants identified broad terms (e.g., “sex life”) to assess sexual experience and exposed the challenges of measuring sexual functioning consistently, considering both adjusted and unadjusted sexual experiences.

Conclusions

Cognitive interviews were critical for item refinement in the development of the PROMIS measure of sexual function. Efforts are underway to validate the measure in larger cancer populations.

vorige artikel Differential item functioning was negligible in an adaptive test of functional status for patients with knee impairments who spoke English or Hebrew

volgende artikel Health utility scores of colorectal cancer based on societal preference in Japan

Horner, M. J., Ries, L. A. G., Krapcho, M., Neyman, N., Aminou, R., Howlader, N., et al. (Eds) SEER Cancer Facts Sheet. National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD (based on November 2008 data submission). http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/all.html.

Committee on Cancer Survivorship. (2006). Improving care and quality of life, institute of medicine. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Bober, S. L., & Park, E. R. (2008). Let’s talk about sex and cancer. Boston Globe, A11.

Schover, L. R. (2005). Sexuality and fertility after cancer. Hematology (American Society of Hematology Education Program, 52, 3–527.

Krebs, L. U. (2008). Sexual assessment in cancer care: Concepts, methods, and strategies for success. Seminars in Oncology Nursing, 24(2), 80–90.PubMedCrossRef

National Cancer Institute. (2004). Sexuality and reproductive issues (PDQ^®). Version date 05/20/2009. Available at: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/supportivecare/sexuality/healthprofessional.

Hordern, A., & Street, A. (2007). Communicating about patient sexuality and intimacy after cancer: Mismatched expectations and unmet needs. Medical Journal of Australia, 186(5), 224–227.PubMed

Jeffery, D. D., Tzeng, J. P., Keefe, F. J., Porter, L. S., Hahn, E. A., Flynn, K. E., et al. (2009). Initial report of the cancer patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) sexual function committee: Review of sexual function measures and domains used in oncology. Cancer, 115(6), 1142–1153.PubMedCrossRef

Arrington, R., CoFrancesco, J., & Wu, A. W. (2004). Questionnaires to measure sexual quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 13(10), 1643–1658.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: Plans for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45(5 Suppl 1), S22–S31.

11.

Garcia, S. F., Cella, D., Clauser, S. B., Flynn, K. E., Lad, T., Lai, J. S., et al. (2007). Standardizing patient-reported outcomes assessment in cancer clinical trials: A patient-reported outcomes measurement information system initiative. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25(32), 5106–5112.PubMedCrossRef

12.

DeWalt, D. A., Rothrock, N., Yount, S., Stone, A. A., & PROMIS Cooperative Group. (2007). Evaluation of item candidates: The Promis qualitative item review. Medical Care, 45(5), S12–S21.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. (1966). Human sexual response. Toronto, NY: Bantam.

14.

Flynn, K. E., Tzeng, J., Jeffery, D. D., Reeve, B. B., Weinfurt, K. P., & The PROMIS Sexual Function Domain Subcommittee. (2007). Conceptualizations of sexual functioning and intimacy among cancer sufferers and survivors. Psychooncology, 16(S2), S135–S136.

15.

Forsyth, B. H., & Lessler, J. T. (1991). Cognitive laboratory methods: A taxonomy. In P. P. Biemer, L. E. Lyberg, N. A. Mathiowetz, & S. Sudman (Eds.), Measurement errors in surveys (pp. 393–418). New York: Wiley.

16.

Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

17.

McColl, E., Meadows, K., & Barofsky, I. (2003). Cognitive aspects of survey methodology and quality of life assessment. Quality of Life Research, 12(3), 217–218.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Willis, G. B., Reeve, B. B., & Barofsky, I. (2005). The use of cognitive interviewing techniques in quality of life and patient-reported outcomes assessment. In J. Lipscomb, C. C. Gotay, & C. Snyder (Eds.), Outcomes assessment in cancer: Measures, methods, and applications (pp. 610–623). New York: Cambridge University Press.

19.

Broderick, J. E., Schwartz, J. E., Vikingstad, G., Pribbernow, M., Grossman, S., & Stone, A. A. (2008). The accuracy of pain and fatigue items across different reporting periods. Pain, 139(1), 146–157.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Rosen, R. C., Riley, A., Wagner, G., Osterloh, I. H., Kirkpatrick, J., & Mishra, A. (1997). The international index of erectile function (IIEF): A multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology, 49(6), 822–830.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Litwin, M. S., Hays, R. D., Fink, A., Ganz, P. A., Leake, B., & Brook, R. H. (1998). The UCLA prostate cancer index: Development, reliability, and validity of a health-related quality of life measure. Medical Care, 36(7), 1002–1012.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Using cognitive interviews to evaluate items for measuring sexual functioning across cancer populations: improvements and remaining challenges
Auteurs: Alice K. Fortune-Greeley
Kathryn E. Flynn
Diana D. Jeffery
Megan S. Williams
Francis J. Keefe
Bryce B. Reeve
Gordon B. Willis
Kevin P. Weinfurt
Publicatiedatum: 01-10-2009
Uitgeverij: Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 8/2009
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9523-x

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 8/2009

Predictive value of serial measurements of quality of life on all-cause mortality in prostate cancer patients: data from CaPSURE™ (cancer of the prostate strategic urologic research endeavor) database

Impact of demographic factors, medication and symptoms on disease-specific quality of life in inflammatory bowel disease

Concordance of cancer patients’ function, symptoms, and supportive care needs

The practical impact of differential item functioning analyses in a health-related quality of life instrument

How sharp is the short QuickDASH? A refined content and validity analysis of the short form of the disabilities of the shoulder, arm and hand questionnaire in the strata of symptoms and function and specific joint conditions

Prostate cancer-specific anxiety in Dutch patients on active surveillance: validation of the memorial anxiety scale for prostate cancer