Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors (QLACS) questionnaire: application in a sample of short-term survivors

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to validate the Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors (QLACS) in short-term Spanish cancer survivor’s patients.MethodsPatients with breast, colorectal or prostate cancer that had finished their initial cancer treatment 3 years before the beginning of this study completed QLACS, WHOQOL, Short Form-36, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, EORTC-QLQ-BR23 and EQ-5D. Cultural adaptation was made based on established guidelines. Reliability was evaluated using internal consistency and test-retest. Convergent validity was studied by mean of Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Structural validity was determined by a second-order confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch analysis was used to assess the unidimensionality of the Generic and Cancer-specific scales.ResultsCronbach’s alpha were above 0.7 in all domains and summary scales. Test-retest coefficients were 0.88 for Generic and 0.82 for Cancer-specific summary scales.QLACS generic summary scale was correlated with other generic criterion measures, SF-36 MCS (r = − 0.74) and EQ-VAS (r = − 0.63). QLACS cancer-specific scale had lower values with the same constructs.CFA provided satisfactory fit indices in all cases. The RMSEA value was 0.061 and CFI and TLI values were 0.929 and 0.925, respectively. All factor loadings were higher than 0.40 and statistically significant (P < 0.001). Generic summary scale had eight misfitting items. In the remaining 20 items, the unidimensionality was supported. Cancer Specific summary scale showed four misfitting items, the remaining showed unidimensionality.ConclusionsThe findings support the validity and reliability of QLACS questionnaire to be used in short-term cancer survivors.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12955-015-0378-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Validation of the Korean Version of the Quality of Life–Cancer Survivors (QOL-CS-K) Questionnaire in Lymphoma Survivors

“…The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) [ 4 ] and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia [ 5 ] have been the most frequently used instruments for assessing the QOL of lymphoma survivors. However, these measures do not detect new symptoms and concerns that may arise after patients complete their cancer treatments [ 6 ]. Some studies have used generic measures, such as the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey [ 7 ] to evaluate the QOL of lymphoma survivors [ 8 ] as well; however, it also has limitations because it does not address specific problems experienced by cancer survivors [ 3 ].…”

Iranian Version of the Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors (QLACS) Questionnaire: Examining Face and Content Validity, Exploratory Factor Analysis and Reliability

“…Quality of life evaluation can help to determine the necessary interventions for improving cancer survivor's quality of life. Among the available tools, we used the QLACS questionnaire because it covered different aspects of life among cancer survivors (3). In this study, after the translation process, we evaluated the face, content and construct validity and reliability of the questionnaire.…”

“…Today, the rate of breast cancer mortality has reduced because of advancements in its screening and treatment methods. Thus, the percentage of patients living with this cancer is increasing (3). An American study showed that 89.2% of women with breast cancer were alive after five years of cancer diagnosis (4).…”

Komitmen Organisasi dan Sikap Whistle-Blowing: Apakah Hubungannya Dimoderasi Oleh Persepsi Dukungan Organisasi?

“…Hasil regresi variabel independen komitmen organisasi (X) terhadap variabel dependen whistleblowing (Y) yang diperoleh dari persamaan pertama, dinyatakan sebagai berikut: Tabel 2 diatas, dijelaskan sebagai berikut : (1) Konstanta sebesar 5.433 artinya sikap whistle-blowing dalam skala interval adalah sebesar 5.433 jika tidak ada komitmen organisasi (X 1 ), persepsi tingkat reliabel lebih dari 0,60 (Escobar et al, 2015 Tabel 3 diatas, dijelaskan sebagai berikut: (1) Pada Model 1 / Tingkat I menyatakan komitmen organisasi berpengaruh positif terhadap sikap whistle-blowing pegawai di Perguruan Tinggi Negeri di Kota Bandung dengan nilai signifikansi 0.000, nilai tersebut lebih kecil dari 0.05. (2) Pada Model 2/ Tingkat I menyatakan bahwa variabel persepsi dukungan organisasi (M) berpengaruh positif terhadap sikap whistle-blowing pegawai di Perguruan Tinggi Negeri di Kota Bandung dengan nilai signifikansi 0.000 lebih kecil dari 0.05.…”