4.6 Article

Impact of reconceptualization response shift on rating of quality of life over time among people with advanced cancer

Journal

SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER
Volume 26, Issue 9, Pages 3063-3071

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-018-4156-7

Keywords

Response shift; Reconceptualization; Individualized measures; Patient-Generated Index (PGI); Quality of life

Funding

  1. Terry Fox Research Institute
  2. Cancer Research Society/Rob Lutterman Pancreatic Cancer Research Grant
  3. Chercheur-clinicien Boursier award from Fond de Recherche Sante Quebec, Quebec, Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background People with cancer may experience change in what constitutes quality of life (QOL) over time as a result of the cancer progression (true change) or adaptation to the experience, considered as a response shift phenomenon. As individualized measures are ideally suited to explore response shift, this study aimed to estimate the extent to which reconceptualization response shift occurred over time in a cancer population and the impact of this response shift on estimates of change on QOL measures. Methods Ninety-seven people with advanced cancer completed the study measures including the Patient-Generated Index (PGI) at diagnosis (T0) and 1 year later (T1). The response shift indicator was the change in the number of areas nominated (range - 4 to + 3). Multivariate linear regression was used to estimate the effect of changing areas on change in the PGI score, single indicators of global QOL, and the EQ-5D(index) adjusted for age and sex. Results Approximately 72% of people in this sample either added or dropped areas over time. People who dropped more than two areas had higher PGI scores at T1 than T0 while people who added areas showed low PGI score. Conclusion The results are consistent with the PGI framework as areas nominated tend to focus on negative aspects of QOL.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available