Comprehensiveness of Quality of Life Instruments in Capturing Concerns Related to Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Neutropenia is a serious hematologic consequence of cancer chemotherapy that can lead to further complications such as febrile neutropenia (FN). FN is potentially life threatening and often requires hospitalization. Few studies have evaluated the impact of neutropenia on quality of life (QoL). This study quantified QoL using two nonneutropenia-specific instruments, the EQ-5D questionnaire, a generic tool used to measure health-related QoL, and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) questionnaire, and a neutropenia-specific instrument, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Neutropenia (FACT-N) questionnaire. The FACT-G is a 27-item questionnaire that examines QoL in patients with cancer using four subscales. A neutropenia-specific subscale (NSS) has been developed for use with the FACT-G; this combined questionnaire is the FACT-N. Data were collected from patients, who provided informed consent, and who were admitted to Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada, for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced FN. Linear regression models were fitted to examine the relationship of scores from the neutropenia-specific instrument with those obtained from the other instruments. Two models were fitted using the NSS as the response variable. Predictors for the regression models were the FACT-G scores for each of the subscales (physical, emotional, social and functional wellbeing) and the five domains of the EQ-5D (mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression) along with the visual analog scale (VAS) component of this tool. The physical and emotional wellbeing subscales of the FACT-G had a strong relationship to the NSS (p < 0.05); the social and functional well-being subscales had a much weaker relationship (p > 0.5). For the EQ-5D, the pain/discomfort domain had the strongest relationship to the NSS (p=0.18); the remaining domains, with or without the VAS, all demonstrated a weaker relationship (p > 0.5). Model fit was assessed by the adjusted R2 statistic; it was 0.54 when FACT-G subscales were used as the predictors compared to −0.04 for the EQ-5D domains indicating that the FACT-G was a better predictor of neutropenia-related concerns. Neutropenia concerns appear to be more closely related to cancer specific QoL compared to general quality of life as demonstrated by the stronger relationship of the NSS to the FACT-G than to the EQ-5D. This may be due to the comprehensiveness of the FACT-G questionnaire where a possible score anywhere from 0 to 24 or 28 can be obtained in each of the subscales, compared to three-point descriptive system for each of the domains of the EQ-5D.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».