• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • UA Graduate and Undergraduate Research
    • UA Theses and Dissertations
    • Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • UA Graduate and Undergraduate Research
    • UA Theses and Dissertations
    • Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UA Campus RepositoryCommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournalThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournal

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    About

    AboutUA Faculty PublicationsUA DissertationsUA Master's ThesesUA Honors ThesesUA PressUA YearbooksUA CatalogsUA Libraries

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Assessing Psychometric Equivalence of Paper-and-Pencil and Interactive Voice Response (IVR) Modes of Administration for the EQ-5D and the QLQ-C30

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    azu_etd_10040_sip1_m.pdf
    Size:
    1.333Mb
    Format:
    PDF
    Description:
    azu_etd_10040_sip1_m.pdf
    Download
    Author
    Lundy, John Jason
    Issue Date
    2008
    Keywords
    ePRO
    EQ-5D
    Equivalence
    IVR
    Patient Reported Outcomes
    QLQ-C30
    Advisor
    Coons, Stephen Joel
    Committee Chair
    Coons, Stephen Joel
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Publisher
    The University of Arizona.
    Rights
    Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
    Abstract
    Electronic data capture technologies, such as interactive voice response (IVR) systems, are emerging as important alternatives for collecting self-reported data. The purpose of this research was to assess the measurement equivalence between the original paper-based versions and the adapted interactive voice response (IVR) versions of the EQ-5D and the QLQ-C30. Furthermore, we examined the test-retest reliability of two consecutive administrations of the IVR versions of the EQ-5D and the QLQ-C30. The comparison of the paper and IVR versions of the EQ-5D was conducted utilizing a crossover design with subjects randomly assigned to one of two assessment orders: 1) paper then IVR or 2) IVR then paper. A convenience sample of in-treatment outpatient cancer clinic patients (n=139) were asked to complete each assessment two days apart. For the test-retest component, outpatient cancer clinic patients (n=127) were asked to complete the IVR-based EQ-5D twice, two days apart. The analyses tested for mean differences (paired t-test) and test-retest reliability (ICC).In the crossover analysis, ten of the fifteen mean differences analyzed for the scales and items of the QLQ-C30 were within the equivalence interval set a priori. The ICCs for the scales and items of the QLQ-C30 ranged from 0.698 to 0.899. Two of the items, insomnia and appetite loss, did not meet our threshold of being statistically different from an ICC of 0.70. The EQ-5D index score means were equivalent between paper and IVR, however the EQ VAS score differences were not wholly contained in the equivalence interval. The ICCs were above 0.890 for the index and the EQ VAS. In the test-retest analysis, the ICCs for the nine multi-item scales for the QLQ-C30 were all above 0.69, ranging from 0.698 to 0.891. Ten of the fifteen mean differences analyzed were within the equivalence interval set a priori. For the EQ-5D, the mean differences were wholly contained within the equivalence intervals for both the index and the EQ VAS and the ICCs were significantly different from 0.70. Overall, the IVR version of the questionnaires provided psychometrically equivalent results to those obtained on the original paper version and showed good stability over time.
    Type
    text
    Electronic Dissertation
    Degree Name
    Ph.D.
    Degree Level
    doctoral
    Degree Program
    Pharmaceutical Sciences
    Graduate College
    Degree Grantor
    University of Arizona
    Collections
    Dissertations

    entitlement

     
    The University of Arizona Libraries | 1510 E. University Blvd. | Tucson, AZ 85721-0055
    Tel 520-621-6442 | repository@u.library.arizona.edu
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2017  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us | Send Feedback
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.