covid
Buscar en
Revista Colombiana de Cancerología
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Colombiana de Cancerología Validación de la escala FACT-Cx en Colombia usando el modelo de teoría de resp...
Journal Information
Vol. 15. Issue 1.
Pages 13-21 (January 2011)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 15. Issue 1.
Pages 13-21 (January 2011)
Full text access
Validación de la escala FACT-Cx en Colombia usando el modelo de teoría de respuesta al ítem
Validation of FACT-Cx Scale in Colombia Using Item Response Theory
Visits
3965
Ricardo Sánchez1,2,
Corresponding author
rsanchezpe@unal.edu.co

Correspondencia: Ricardo Sánchez, Grupo de Investigación Clínica. Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Av. 1a No. 9-85, Bogotá, Colombia. Tel.:éfono: 334 1997.
, Licet Villamizar1, Natascha Ortiz1
1 Grupo de Investigación Clínica, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Bogotá D.C., Colombia
2 Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá D.C., Colombia
This item has received
Article information
Resumen
Objetivos

Determinar las propiedades psicométricas y las características de medición de la escala Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cervix(FACT-Cx) utilizando análisis de Rasch.

Métodos

Se efectuó un estudio de validación de escala aplicando el cuestionario FACT-Cx a 218 pacientes con cáncer de cuello uterino. Luego de ajustar la calificación de ítems se efectuó un análisis utilizando un modelo de Rasch de crédito parcial para datos politómicos.

Resultados

La mayor puntuación correspondió al dominio “preocupaciones específicas relacionadas con la patología de cuello uterino”. Los ítems mostraron adecuados índices de confiabilidad y separación (0,89 y 5,96, respectivamente). Los menores valores en dichos índices en el caso de las personas sugieren un rango restringido del constructo en esta muestra. Los indicadores de ajuste sugieren homogeneidad del constructo. Mientras que el apoyo familiar resultó ser el aspecto con mayor repercusión sobre la calificación positiva del nivel de calidad de vida, la desesperanza fue el que más negativamente influyó sobre la calificación. El ítem relacionado con la preocupación por la función reproductiva resultó no medir adecuadamente el constructo; probablemente, debido a las características de edad de las pacientes. La evaluación del sistema de puntuación mostró que se detecta adecuadamente la graduación del atributo, pero hay categorías redundantes.

Conclusiones

La escala FACT-Cx está configurada por un conjunto de ítems que, en general, miden adecuadamente una estructura unidimensional. El sistema de puntuación parece tener niveles redundantes. Las propiedades de uno de los ítems, relacionado con la función reproductiva, deberían evaluarse en una muestra con mayor espectro de edad.

Palabras clave:
Calidad de vida
neoplasias del cuello uterino
escalas
estudios de validación
Abstract
Objective

To determine the psychometric properties and measurement features of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cervix (FACTCx) by means of Rasch analysis.

Methods

A scale validation study using the FACT-Cx questionnaire was carried out among 218 cervical cancer patients. Following item scoring, analysis was performed with the partial credit Rasch model for polytomous data.

Results

The highest score corresponded to the domain of 'specific concerns related to cervical pathology'. Items showed adequate reliability and separation rates (0.89 and 5.96, respectively). In the cases of individual persons, the lower index values suggest a restricted construct range in this sample. Adjustment indicators suggest construct homogeneity. Family support scored highest as having positive impact on quality of life; whereas, a sense of hopelessness rated as the most negative. The item related to concern over reproductive ability was not adequately measured by the construct; due, probably, to patients' ages. Evaluation of the scoring system showed adequate detection of the scoring attribute, but some categories are redundant.

Conclusions

The FACT-Cx scale is made up of a set of items which, in general, adequately measures a one-dimensional structure. However, the scoring system appears to include redundancies. The properties associated with the reproductive ability item should be assessed in a sample that includes greater range in subjects' ages.

Key words:
Quality of life
uterine cervical neoplasm
questionnaires
validation studies
Full text is only aviable in PDF
Referencias
[1.]
K. Canfell, F. Sitas, V. Beral.
Cervical cancer in Australia and the United Kingdom: comparison of screeningpolicy and uptake, and cancer incidence and mortality.
Med J Aust, 185 (2006), pp. 482-486
[2.]
D.M. Parkin, F. Bray, J. Ferlay, et al.
Global cancer statistics, 2002.
CA Cancer J Clin, 55 (2005), pp. 74-108
[3.]
F. Landoni, A. Maneo, G. Cormio, et al.
Class II versus class III radical hysterectomy in stage IB-IIA cervical cancer: a prospective randomized study.
GynecolOncol, 80 (2001), pp. 3-12
[4.]
G.H. Guyatt, D.H. Feeny, D.L. Patrick.
Measuring healthrelated quality of life.
Ann Intern Med, 118 (1993), pp. 622-629
[5.]
M.A. Testa, D.C. Simonson.
Assessment of quality-of-life outcomes.
N Engl J Med, 334 (1996), pp. 835-840
[6.]
K.T. Ashing-Giwa, J.W. Lim, J. Tang.
Surviving cervical cancer: does health-related quality of life influence survival?.
GynecolOncol, 118 (2010), pp. 35-42
[7.]
M. Frumovitz, C.C. Sun, L.R. Schover, et al.
Quality of life and sexual functioning in cervical cancer survivors.
J ClinOncol, 23 (2005), pp. 7428-7436
[8.]
C. Li, G. Samsioe, C. Iosif.
Quality of life in long-term survivors of cervical cancer.
Maturitas, 32 (1999), pp. 95-102
[9.]
T. Luckett, M. King, P. Butow, et al.
Assessing health-related quality of life in gynecologic oncology: a systematic review of questionnaires and their ability to detect clinically important differences and change.
Int J Gynecol Cancer, 20 (2010), pp. 664-684
[10.]
E.R. Greimel, K. KuljanicVlasic, A.C. Waldenstrom, et al.
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality-of-Life questionnaire cervical cancer module: EORTC QLQ-CX24.
Cancer, 107 (2006), pp. 1812-1822
[11.]
K. Webster, D. Cella, K. Yost.
The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System: properties, applications, and interpretation.
Health Qual Life Outcomes, 1 (2003), pp. 79
[12.]
Y.C. Zeng, S.S. Ching, A.Y. Loke.
Quality of life measurement in women with cervical cancer: implications for Chinese cervical cancer survivors.
Health Qual Life Outcomes, 8 (2010), pp. 30
[13.]
E.W. Wolfe, E.V. Smith Jr..
Instrument development tools and activities for measure validation using Rasch models: part I -- instrument development tools.
J Appl Meas, 8 (2007), pp. 97-123
[14.]
E.W. Wolfe, E.V. Smith Jr..
Instrument development tools and activities for measure validation using Rasch models: part II--validation activities.
J Appl Meas, 8 (2007), pp. 204-234
[15.]
C. Luquet, N. Chau, F. Guillemin, et al.
A method for shortening instruments using the Rasch model: validation on a hand functional measure.
Rev EpidemiolSantePublique, 49 (2001), pp. 273-286
[16.]
R.K. Hambleton, H. Swaminathan, H.J. Rogers.
Fundamentals of item response theory.
Sage Publications, (1991),
[17.]
D.L. Patrick, R.A. Deyo.
Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life.
Med Care, 27 (1989), pp. S217-S232
[18.]
A.L. Stewart, R.D. Hays, J.E. Ware Jr..
The MOS short-form general health survey: reliability and validity in a patient population.
Med Care, 26 (1988), pp. 724-735
[19.]
M. Bergner, R.A. Bobbitt, W.E. Pollard, et al.
The sickness impact profile: validation of a health status measure.
Med Care, 14 (1976), pp. 57-67
[20.]
N.K. Aaronson, S. Ahmedzai, M. Bullinger, et al.
The EORTC core quality of life questionnaire: interim results of an international field study.
Effects of cancer on quality of life, pp. 185-203
[21.]
B.D. Wright, M.H. Stone.
Best test designs.
MESA Press, (1979),
[22.]
D. Andrich.
A rating formulation for ordered response categories.
Psychometrika, 43 (1978), pp. 561-573
[23.]
B.D. Wright, J.M. Linacre.
Reasonable mean-square fit values.
Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8 (1994), pp. 370
[24.]
J.M. Linacre.
Optimizing rating scale category effectiveness.
J Appl Meas, 3 (2002), pp. 85-106
[25.]
S. Franceschi, M. Plummer, G. Clifford, et al.
Differences in the risk of cervical cancer and human papillomavirus infection by education level.
Br J Cancer, 101 (2009), pp. 865-870
[26.]
W.A. Vega.
Hispanic families in the 1980s: A decade of research.
J Marriage Fam, 52 (1990), pp. 1015-1024
[27.]
J.J. Dapueto, C. Francolino, L. Servente, et al.
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 Qual Life Outcomes, 1 (2003), pp. 32
[28.]
N.W. Scott, P.M. Fayers, N.K. Aaronson, et al.
Differential item functioning (DIF) in the EORTC QLQ-C30: a comparison of baseline, on-treatment and off-treatment data.
QualLife Res, 18 (2009), pp. 381-388
Copyright © 2011. Instituto Nacional de Cancerología
Download PDF
Article options