Measurement invariance of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal quality-of-life instrument among modes of administration

Carlos K H Wong, Cindy L K Lam, Brendan Mulhern, Wai-Lun Law, Jensen T C Poon, Dora L W Kwong, Janice Tsang, Carlos K H Wong, Cindy L K Lam, Brendan Mulhern, Wai-Lun Law, Jensen T C Poon, Dora L W Kwong, Janice Tsang

Abstract

Objectives: To test for the measurement invariance of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C) in patients with colorectal neoplasms between two modes of administration (self- and interviewer administrations). It is important to establish the measurement invariance of the FACT-C across different modes of administration to ascertain whether it is valid to pool FACT-C data collected by different modes or to assess each group separately.

Methods: A cross-sectional sample of 391 Chinese patients with colorectal neoplasms was recruited from specialist outpatient clinics between September 2009 and July 2010. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test the original five-factor model of the FACT-C on data collected by self- and interviewer administrations in single-group analysis. Multiple-group CFA was then used to compare the factor structure between the two modes of administration using chi-square tests and other goodness-of-fit statistics.

Results: The hypothesized five-factor model of FACT-C demonstrated good fit in each group. Configural invariance and metric invariance were fully supported in multiple-group CFA. Some item intercepts and their corresponding error variances were not identical between administration groups, suggesting evidence of partial strict factorial invariance.

Conclusions: Our results confirmed that the five-factor structure of FACT-C was invariant in Chinese patients using both self- and interviewer administrations. It is appropriate to pool or compare data in the emotional well-being and colorectal cancer subscale scores collected by both administrations. Measurement invariance in three items, one from each of the other subscales, may be contaminated by response bias between modes of administration.

References

    1. Hahn EA, Rao D, Cella D, Choi SW. Comparability of interview- and self-administration of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) in English- and Spanish-speaking ambulatory cancer patients. Medical Care. 2008;46(4):423–431. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181648e6e.
    1. Meredith W. Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika. 1993;58(4):525–543. doi: 10.1007/BF02294825.
    1. Meredith W, Teresi JA. An essay on measurement and factorial invariance. Medical Care. 2006;44(11 Suppl 3):S69–S77. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000245438.73837.89.
    1. Gregorich SE. Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups?: Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Medical Care. 2006;44(11 Suppl 3):S78–S94. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000245454.12228.8f.
    1. Lin CY, Luh WM, Yang AL, Su CT, Wang JD, Ma HI. Psychometric properties and gender invariance of the Chinese version of the self-report pediatric quality of life inventory version 4.0: short form is acceptable. Quality of Life Research. 2012;21(1):177–182. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9928-1.
    1. Cherepanov D, Palta M, Fryback DG, Robert SA, Hays RD, Kaplan RM. Gender differences in multiple underlying dimensions of health-related quality of life are associated with sociodemographic and socioeconomic status. Medical Care. 2011;49(11):1021–1030. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31822ebed9.
    1. King-Kallimanis, B., ter Hoeven, C., de Haes, H., Smets, E., Koning, C., & Oort, F. (2011). Assessing measurement invariance of a health-related quality-of-life questionnaire in radiotherapy patients. Quality of Life Research. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-0094-2.
    1. Saban K, Bryant F, Reda D, Stroupe K, Hynes D. Measurement invariance of the kidney disease and quality of life instrument (KDQOL-SF) across Veterans and non-Veterans. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2010;8(1):120. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-120.
    1. Clench-Aas J, Nes R, Dalgard O, Aarø L. Dimensionality and measurement invariance in the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Norway. Quality of Life Research. 2011;20(8):1307–1317. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9859-x.
    1. Brunet J, McDonough MH, Hadd V, Crocker PRE, Sabiston CM. The Posttraumatic Growth Inventory: An examination of the factor structure and invariance among breast cancer survivors. Psycho-Oncology. 2010;19(8):830–838. doi: 10.1002/pon.1640.
    1. Dapueto JJ, Servente L, Francolino C, Hahn EA. Determinants of quality of life in patients with cancer. Cancer. 2005;103(5):1072–1081. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20870.
    1. Lix L, Metge C, Leslie W. Measurement equivalence of osteoporosis-specific and general quality-of-life instruments in Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal women. Quality of Life Research. 2009;18(5):619–627. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9470-6.
    1. Mora P, Contrada R, Berkowitz A, Musumeci-Szabo T, Wisnivesky J, Halm E. Measurement invariance of the Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire across African–American and Latino adult asthma patients. Quality of Life Research. 2009;18(3):371–380. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9443-9.
    1. Theuns P, Hofmans J, Mazaheri M, Van Acker F, Bernheim J. Cross-national comparability of the WHOQOL-BREF: A measurement invariance approach. Quality of Life Research. 2010;19(2):219–224. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9577-9.
    1. Sudano JJ, Perzynski A, Love TE, Lewis SA, Murray PM, Huber GM, Ruo B, Baker DW. Measuring disparities: Bias in the short form-36v2 among Spanish-speaking medical patients. Medical Care. 2011;49(5):480–488. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31820fb944.
    1. Ho, S. M. Y., Law, L. S. C., Wang, G.-L., Shih, S.-M., Hsu, S.-H., & Hou, Y.-C. (2011). Psychometric analysis of the Chinese version of the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory with cancer patients in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Psycho-Oncology. doi:10.1002/pon.3024.
    1. Buskirk TD, Stein KD. Telephone vs. mail survey gives different SF-36 quality-of-life scores among cancer survivors. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2008;61(10):1049–1055. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.012.
    1. Cheung YB, Goh C, Thumboo J, Khoo KS, Wee J. Quality of life scores differed according to mode of administration in a review of three major oncology questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2006;59(2):185–191. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.06.011.
    1. Wan GJ, Counte MA, Cella DF, Hernandez L, McGuire DB, Deasy S, Shiomoto G, Hahn E. The impact of socio-cultural and clinical factors on health-related quality of life reports among Hispanic and African-American cancer patients. Journal of Outcome Measurement. 1999;3(3):200–215.
    1. Bowling A. Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality. Journal of Public Health. 2005;27(3):281–291. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdi031.
    1. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, Sarafian B, Linn E, Bonomi A, Silberman M, Yellen SB, Winicour P, Brannon J, et al. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: Development and validation of the general measure. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1993;11(3):570–579.
    1. Dapueto J, Francolino C, Servente L, Chang CH, Gotta I, Levin R, Abreu M. Evaluation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Spanish version 4 in South America: Classic psychometric and item response theory analyses. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2003;1(1):32. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-1-32.
    1. Sánchez R, Ballesteros M, Arnold BJ. Validation of the FACT-G scale for evaluating quality of life in cancer patients in Colombia. Quality of Life Research. 2011;20(1):19–29. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9727-0.
    1. Smith A, Wright P, Selby P, Velikova G. A Rasch and factor analysis of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2007;5(1):19. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-5-19.
    1. Ward WL, Hahn EA, Mo F, Hernandez L, Tulsky DS, Cella D. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C) quality of life instrument. Quality of Life Research. 1999;8(3):181–195. doi: 10.1023/A:1008821826499.
    1. Webster K, Cella D, Yost K. The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measurement system: Properties, applications, and interpretation. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2003;1(1):79. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-1-79.
    1. Hays RD, Brown J, Brown LU, Spritzer KL, Crall JJ. Classical test theory and item response theory analyses of multi-item scales assessing parents’ perceptions of their children’s dental care. Medical Care. 2006;44(11 Suppl 3):S60–S68. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000245144.90229.d0.
    1. Wong, C. K. H., Lam, C. L. K., Law, W. L., Poon, J. T. C., Chan, P., Kwong, D. L. W., et al. (2011). Validity and reliability study on traditional Chinese FACT-C in Chinese patients with colorectal neoplasm. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01753.x.
    1. Wong, C. K. H., Lam, C. L. K., Poon, J. T. C., McGhee, S. M., Law, W. L., Kwong, D. L. W., et al. (2011). Direct medical costs of care for Chinese patients with colorectal neoplasia: A health care service provider perspective. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01776.x.
    1. Wong CKH, Lam CLK, Rowen D, McGhee SM, Ma KP, Law WL, Poon JTC, Chan P, Kwong DLW, Tsang J. Mapping the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General or -Colorectal to SF-6D in Chinese patients with colorectal neoplasm. Value in Health. 2012;15(3):495–503. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.009.
    1. Wong, C. K. H., Lam, C. L. K., Law, W. L., Poon, J. T. C., Kwong, D. L. W., & Tsang, J. (Under Review). Condition-specific quality of life measure is more responsive than generic quality of life measure in colorectal cancer: All but the social domains. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.
    1. Yoo HJ, Kim JC, Eremenco S, Han OS. Quality of life in colorectal cancer patients with colectomy and the validation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C), version 4. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. 2005;30(1):24–32. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2004.12.009.
    1. Rotonda C, Conroy T, Mercier M, Bonnetain F, Uwer L, Miny J, Montcuquet P, Léonard I, Adenis A, Breysacher G, Guillemin F. Validation of the French version of the colorectal-specific quality-of-life questionnaires EORTC QLQ-CR38 and FACT-C. Quality of Life Research. 2008;17(3):437–445. doi: 10.1007/s11136-008-9322-9.
    1. Widaman KF, Reise SP. Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: Applications in the substance use domain. In: Bryant KJ, Windle M, West SG, editors. The science of prevention: Methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1997. pp. 281–324.
    1. Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford; 2006.
    1. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Testing factorial invariance across groups: A reconceptualization and proposed new method. Journal of Management. 1999;25(1):1–27. doi: 10.1177/014920639902500101.
    1. Steiger JH. Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1990;25(2):173–180. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4.
    1. Bentler PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin. 1990;107(2):238–246. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.
    1. Satorra A, Bentler PM. Correlations to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In: van Eye A, Clogg CC, editors. Latent variable analysis: Applications for developmental research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1994. pp. 399–419.
    1. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. 1999;6(1):1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.
    1. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling. 2002;9(2):233–255. doi: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera