A randomized validation study comparing embedded versus extracted FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index scores

Susan Yount, Marcy List, Hongyan Du, Kathleen Yost, Rita Bode, Bruce Brockstein, Athanassios Argiris, Everett Vokes, Ezra E W Cohen, Bruce Campbell, Veronica Valenzuela, Jacquelyn George, Robyn Egan, Jessica Chen, David Meddis, David Cella

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the impact of administration context (embedded versus stand-alone) on the reliability and validity of the FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index (FHNSI). Methods: Ninety-eight patients with head and neck cancer were randomized to one of two assessment conditions to evaluate the FHNSI's context (items administered embedded within the FACT-H&N or as stand-alone scale) and order of administration in the battery. Results: Planned comparisons on the item and scale levels revealed no systematic order or context differences. The embedded and stand-alone versions of the FHNSI showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.79-0.87). Correlations were high between the FHNSI versions and the physical and functional well-being scales of the FACT-H&N (0.70-0.84) and measures of pain intensity (-0.73, -0.74) and depression (-0.71, -0.74); moderate to large with the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck subscales (PSS-HN; 0.46-0.71); and low with an anxiety measure (0.30, 0.34). Both FHNSI versions differentiated patients grouped by performance status (p < .0001, p < .0001) and global rating of change (p < .0001, p < 0.01). The FHNSI's minimally important difference range was 3-4 points. Conclusion: The FHNSI is a reliable and valid symptom index, which can be administered alone or scored using items embedded within the FACT-H&N.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1615-1626
Number of pages12
JournalQuality of Life Research
Volume16
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Validation Studies
Neck
Head
Head and Neck Neoplasms
Reproducibility of Results
Anxiety
Depression
Pain

Keywords

  • Head and neck cancer
  • Measurement issues
  • Signs & symptoms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rehabilitation
  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

A randomized validation study comparing embedded versus extracted FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index scores. / Yount, Susan; List, Marcy; Du, Hongyan; Yost, Kathleen; Bode, Rita; Brockstein, Bruce; Argiris, Athanassios; Vokes, Everett; Cohen, Ezra E W; Campbell, Bruce; Valenzuela, Veronica; George, Jacquelyn; Egan, Robyn; Chen, Jessica; Meddis, David; Cella, David.

In: Quality of Life Research, Vol. 16, No. 10, 12.2007, p. 1615-1626.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Yount, S, List, M, Du, H, Yost, K, Bode, R, Brockstein, B, Argiris, A, Vokes, E, Cohen, EEW, Campbell, B, Valenzuela, V, George, J, Egan, R, Chen, J, Meddis, D & Cella, D 2007, 'A randomized validation study comparing embedded versus extracted FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index scores', Quality of Life Research, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 1615-1626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-007-9270-9
Yount, Susan ; List, Marcy ; Du, Hongyan ; Yost, Kathleen ; Bode, Rita ; Brockstein, Bruce ; Argiris, Athanassios ; Vokes, Everett ; Cohen, Ezra E W ; Campbell, Bruce ; Valenzuela, Veronica ; George, Jacquelyn ; Egan, Robyn ; Chen, Jessica ; Meddis, David ; Cella, David. / A randomized validation study comparing embedded versus extracted FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index scores. In: Quality of Life Research. 2007 ; Vol. 16, No. 10. pp. 1615-1626.
@article{f65a14f86a8641cf9c0899f8b47565c1,
title = "A randomized validation study comparing embedded versus extracted FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index scores",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate the impact of administration context (embedded versus stand-alone) on the reliability and validity of the FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index (FHNSI). Methods: Ninety-eight patients with head and neck cancer were randomized to one of two assessment conditions to evaluate the FHNSI's context (items administered embedded within the FACT-H&N or as stand-alone scale) and order of administration in the battery. Results: Planned comparisons on the item and scale levels revealed no systematic order or context differences. The embedded and stand-alone versions of the FHNSI showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.79-0.87). Correlations were high between the FHNSI versions and the physical and functional well-being scales of the FACT-H&N (0.70-0.84) and measures of pain intensity (-0.73, -0.74) and depression (-0.71, -0.74); moderate to large with the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck subscales (PSS-HN; 0.46-0.71); and low with an anxiety measure (0.30, 0.34). Both FHNSI versions differentiated patients grouped by performance status (p < .0001, p < .0001) and global rating of change (p < .0001, p < 0.01). The FHNSI's minimally important difference range was 3-4 points. Conclusion: The FHNSI is a reliable and valid symptom index, which can be administered alone or scored using items embedded within the FACT-H&N.",
keywords = "Head and neck cancer, Measurement issues, Signs & symptoms",
author = "Susan Yount and Marcy List and Hongyan Du and Kathleen Yost and Rita Bode and Bruce Brockstein and Athanassios Argiris and Everett Vokes and Cohen, {Ezra E W} and Bruce Campbell and Veronica Valenzuela and Jacquelyn George and Robyn Egan and Jessica Chen and David Meddis and David Cella",
year = "2007",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1007/s11136-007-9270-9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "1615--1626",
journal = "Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation",
issn = "0962-9343",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A randomized validation study comparing embedded versus extracted FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index scores

AU - Yount, Susan

AU - List, Marcy

AU - Du, Hongyan

AU - Yost, Kathleen

AU - Bode, Rita

AU - Brockstein, Bruce

AU - Argiris, Athanassios

AU - Vokes, Everett

AU - Cohen, Ezra E W

AU - Campbell, Bruce

AU - Valenzuela, Veronica

AU - George, Jacquelyn

AU - Egan, Robyn

AU - Chen, Jessica

AU - Meddis, David

AU - Cella, David

PY - 2007/12

Y1 - 2007/12

N2 - Objective: To evaluate the impact of administration context (embedded versus stand-alone) on the reliability and validity of the FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index (FHNSI). Methods: Ninety-eight patients with head and neck cancer were randomized to one of two assessment conditions to evaluate the FHNSI's context (items administered embedded within the FACT-H&N or as stand-alone scale) and order of administration in the battery. Results: Planned comparisons on the item and scale levels revealed no systematic order or context differences. The embedded and stand-alone versions of the FHNSI showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.79-0.87). Correlations were high between the FHNSI versions and the physical and functional well-being scales of the FACT-H&N (0.70-0.84) and measures of pain intensity (-0.73, -0.74) and depression (-0.71, -0.74); moderate to large with the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck subscales (PSS-HN; 0.46-0.71); and low with an anxiety measure (0.30, 0.34). Both FHNSI versions differentiated patients grouped by performance status (p < .0001, p < .0001) and global rating of change (p < .0001, p < 0.01). The FHNSI's minimally important difference range was 3-4 points. Conclusion: The FHNSI is a reliable and valid symptom index, which can be administered alone or scored using items embedded within the FACT-H&N.

AB - Objective: To evaluate the impact of administration context (embedded versus stand-alone) on the reliability and validity of the FACT Head and Neck Symptom Index (FHNSI). Methods: Ninety-eight patients with head and neck cancer were randomized to one of two assessment conditions to evaluate the FHNSI's context (items administered embedded within the FACT-H&N or as stand-alone scale) and order of administration in the battery. Results: Planned comparisons on the item and scale levels revealed no systematic order or context differences. The embedded and stand-alone versions of the FHNSI showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.79-0.87). Correlations were high between the FHNSI versions and the physical and functional well-being scales of the FACT-H&N (0.70-0.84) and measures of pain intensity (-0.73, -0.74) and depression (-0.71, -0.74); moderate to large with the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck subscales (PSS-HN; 0.46-0.71); and low with an anxiety measure (0.30, 0.34). Both FHNSI versions differentiated patients grouped by performance status (p < .0001, p < .0001) and global rating of change (p < .0001, p < 0.01). The FHNSI's minimally important difference range was 3-4 points. Conclusion: The FHNSI is a reliable and valid symptom index, which can be administered alone or scored using items embedded within the FACT-H&N.

KW - Head and neck cancer

KW - Measurement issues

KW - Signs & symptoms

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35848936727&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35848936727&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11136-007-9270-9

DO - 10.1007/s11136-007-9270-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 17922221

AN - SCOPUS:35848936727

VL - 16

SP - 1615

EP - 1626

JO - Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation

JF - Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation

SN - 0962-9343

IS - 10

ER -