CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 689Cancer survivorship and careChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeCancer-related cognitive impairment studies

Measurement of the quality of life in cancer survivors

Ferrell, B. R., Hassey Dow, K., Grant, M.·1995·Quality of Life Research
DOI 10.1007/bf00634747
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A QOL instrument was developed to measure the specific concerns of long term cancer survivors. The QOL-CS is based on previous versions of the QOL instrument developed by researchers at the City of Hope National Medical Centre (Grant, Padilla, and Ferrell). This instrument was revised over a one year pilot by Hassey-Dow and Ferrell. The revised instrument included 41 items representing the four domains of quality of life incorporating physical, psychological, social, and spiritual well being. The present study was conducted as a mail survey to the membership (n = 1,200) of the National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship with 686 subjects responding to the survey. This survey included a Demographic tool, QOL-CS and the FACT-G tool developed by Cella. Psychometric analysis, performed on 686 respondents, included measures of reliability and validity. Two measures of reliability included test-retest and internal consistency. The overall QOL-CS tool test-retest reliability was 0.89 with subscales of Physical r = 0.88, Psychological r = 0.88, Social r = 0.81, and Spiritual, r = 0.90. The second measure of reliability was computation of internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha coefficient as a measure of agreement between items and subscales. Analysis revealed an overall r = 0.93. Subscale alphas average ranged from r = 0.71 for spiritual well being, r = 0.77 for physical, r = 0.81 for social, and r = 0.89 for psychological. Several measures of validity were used to determine the extent to which the instrument measured the concept of QOL in cancer survivors. The first method of content validity was based on a panel of QOL researchers and nurses with expertise in oncology. The second measure used stepwise multiple regression to determine factors most predictive of overall QOL in cancer survivors. Seventeen variables were found to be statistically significant accounting for 91% of the variance in overall QOL. The fourth measure of validity used Pearson's correlations to estimate the relationships between the subscales of QOL-CS and the subscales of the established FACT-G tool. There was moderate to strong correlation between associated subscales including QOL-CS physical to FACT physical (r = 0.74), QOL-CS Psych to FACT Emotional (r = 0.65), QOL Social to FACT Social (r = 0.44). The overall QOL-CS correlation with the FACT-G was 0.78. Additional measures of validity included correlations of individual items of the QOL-CS tool, factor analysis, and construct validity discriminating known groups of cancer survivors. Findings demonstrated that the QOL-CS and its subscales adequately measured QOL in this growing population of cancer survivors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf00634747

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ferrell, B. R., Hassey Dow, K., & Grant, M.
Affiliations
City Of Hope National Medical Center (US)
ORCID
Venue
Quality of Life Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1995-12
Volume
4
Issue
6
Pages
523-531
ISSN
  • 0962-9343 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2649
DOI
10.1007/bf00634747
OpenAlex
W2166845106
Cited by
689
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 29
FWCI
1.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Quality of Life Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Keywords
quality of life, cancer survivors, FACT-G, psychometric validation, physical well-being, psychological well-being, social well-being, spiritual well-being, instrument reliability, assessment validity, predictors of quality of life, cancer survivorship support services, survivorship care planning
MeSH terms
Adult, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Health Services Needs and Demand, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Psychometrics, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Reproducibility of Results, Discriminant Analysis, Survivors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review