Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Conceptual structure of the Taiwan Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the conceptual structure of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) by analyzing data collected from patients with major cancers in Taiwan. The conceptual structure underlying QLQ-C30, including higher-order factors, was explored by structural equation modeling (SEM).

Methods

The Taiwan Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 was used as the measuring instrument. Higher-order models, including mental health/physical health, mental function/physical burden, symptom burden/function, single latent health-related quality of life, formative symptom burden/function, and formative health-related quality of life, were tested.

Results

Study subjects included 283 patients with breast, lung, and nasopharyngeal cancers. The original QLQ-C30 multi-factorial structure demonstrated poor composite reliability of the cognitive function subscale. The formative symptom/burden model was favored by model fit indices, further supporting causal–indicator duality, but was compromised by unexpected associations between symptomatic subscales and latent factors. The formative health-related quality of life was proposed with a single second-order latent factor where symptomatic subscales remained formative. Two additional symptom measures from the formal cognitive function subscale with the formative health-related quality-of-life model were proposed as the alterative conceptual structure for the Taiwan Chinese QLQ-C30.

Conclusions

Results of the current study represent the complete SEM approach for the EORTC QLQ-C30. The formative health-related quality-of-life model with elimination of cognitive function enhances the conceptual structure of the Taiwan Chinese version with parsimonious fit and interpretability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lipscomb, J., Snyder, C. F., & Gotay, C. C. (2007). Cancer outcomes measurement: Through the lens of the medical outcomes trust framework. Quality of Life Research, 16, 143–164.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Robling, M., Matthews, S. J., Hood, K., Russell, I. T., Holloway, R., Wilkinson, C., et al. (2002). The development of a new site-specific measure of quality of life for breast problems: The Cardiff breast scales. Quality of Life Research, 11, 339–348.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kaptein, A. A., Morita, S., & Sakamoto, J. (2005). Quality of life in gastric cancer. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 11, 3189–3196.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., et al. (1993). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85, 365–376.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bergman, B., Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Kaasa, S., & Sullivan, M. (1994). The EORTC QLQ-LC13: A modular supplement to the EORTC core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) for use in lung cancer clinical trials. European Journal of Cancer, 30A, 635–642.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sprangers, M. A., Groenvold, M., Arraras, J. I., Franklin, J., te Velde, A., Muller, M., et al. (1996). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Module first results from a three-country field study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 14, 2756–2768.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bjordal, K., Hammerlid, E., Ahlner-Elmqvist, M., de Graeff, A., Boysen, M., Evensen, J. F., et al. (1999). Quality of life in head and neck cancer patients: Validation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-H&N35. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 17, 1008–1019.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chie, W. C., Chang, K. J., Huang, C. S., & Kuo, W. H. (2003). Quality of life of breast cancer patients in Taiwan: Validation of the Taiwan Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC BR-23. Psychooncology, 12, 729–735.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chie, W. C., Hong, R. L., Lai, C. C., Ting, L. L., & Hsu, M. M. (2003). Quality of life in patients of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Validation of the Taiwan Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EORTC QLQ-H&N35. Quality of Life Research, 12, 93–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chie, W. C., Yang, C. H., Hsu, C., & Yang, P. C. (2004). Quality of life of lung cancer patients: Validation of Taiwan Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13. Quality of Life Research, 13, 257–262.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Huang, C. C., Lien, H. H., Sung, Y. C., Liu, H. T., & Chie, W. C. (2007). Quality of life of patients with gastric cancer in Taiwan: Validation and clinical application of the Taiwan Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-STO22. Psychooncology, 16, 945–949.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait–multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fayers, P. M., Hand, D. J., Bjordal, K., & Groenvold, M. (1997). Causal indicators in quality of life research. Quality of Life Research, 6, 393–406.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Boehmer, S., & Luszczynska, A. (2006). Two kinds of items in quality of life instruments: ‘Indicator and causal variables’ in the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research, 15, 131–141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. McDonald, R. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fayer, P., & Machin, D. (2007). Quality of Life: The assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Fayers, P. M., & Hand, D. J. (1997). Factor analysis, causal indicators and quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 6, 139–150.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gundy, C. M., Fayers, P. M., Groenvold, M., Petersen, M. A., Scott, N. W., Sprangers, M. A., et al. (2012). Comparing higher order models for the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research, 21, 1607–1617.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Huang, C. C., Lien, H. H., Tu, S. H., Huang, C. S., Jeng, J. Y., Chao, H. L., et al. (2010). Quality of life in Taiwanese breast cancer survivors with breast-conserving therapy. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, 109, 493–502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal consistency of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hays, R. D., & Hayasi, T. (1990). Beyond internal consistency reliability: Rationale and user’s guide for multitrait analysis program on the microcomputer. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 22, 167–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Howard, K. I., & Forehand, G. G. (1962). A method for correcting item total correlations for the effect of relevant item inclusion. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 22, 731–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hayduk, L. A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL: Essentials and Advances. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1989). The degree of intention formation as a moderator of the attitude-behavior relationship. Social Psychology Quarterly, 52, 266–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jarvenpaa, S. L., Tractinsky, N., & Vitale, M. (2000). Consumer trust in an internet store. Information Technology and Management, 1, 45–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Cary: SAS Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Netemeyer, R. G., Johnston, M. W., & Burton, S. (1990). Analysis of role conflict and role ambiguity in a structural equation framework. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 148–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hair, J. F., William, C. B., Barry, J. B., & Rolph, E. A. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  34. MacCallum, R., Browne, M., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 2, 130–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I: Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Yun, Y. H., Park, Y. S., Lee, E. S., Bang, S. M., Heo, D. S., Park, S. Y., et al. (2004). Validation of the Korean version of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research, 13, 863–868.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Luo, N., Fones, C. S., Lim, S. E., Xie, F., Thumboo, J., & Li, S. C. (2005). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30): Validation of English version in Singapore. Quality of Life Research, 14, 1181–1186.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kobayashi, K., Takeda, F., Teramukai, S., Gotoh, I., Sakai, H., Yoneda, S., et al. (1998). A cross-validation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) for Japanese with lung cancer. European Journal of Cancer, 34, 810–815.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hong, Z., & Katsuya, K. (2004). Testing psychometric properties of the standard Chinese version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Journal of Epidemiology, 14, 193–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Montazeri, A., Harirchi, I., Vahdani, M., Khaleghi, F., Jarvandi, S., Ebrahimi, M., & Haji-Mahmoodi, M. (1999). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30): Translation and validation study of the Iranian version. Supportive Care in Cancer, 7, 400–406.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Silpakit, C., Sirilerttrakul, S., Jirajarus, M., Sirisinha, T., Sirachainan, E., & Ratanatharathorn, V. (2006). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30): Validation study of the Thai version. Quality of Life Research, 15, 167–172.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Chaukar, D. A., Das, A. K., Deshpande, M. S., Pai, P. S., Pathak, K. A., Chaturvedi, P., et al. (2005). Quality of life of head and neck cancer patient: Validation of the European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-C30 and European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-H&N 35 in Indian patients. Indian Journal of Cancer, 42, 178–184.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Keller, S. D., Ware, J. E, Jr, Bentler, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Alonso, J., Apolone, G., et al. (1998). Use of structural equation modeling to test the construct validity of the SF-36 Health Survey in ten countries: Results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1179–1188.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Anagnostopoulos, F., Niakas, D., & Pappa, E. (2005). Construct validation of the Greek SF-36 health survey. Quality of Life Research, 14, 1959–1965.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ringdal, G. I., & Ringdal, K. (1993). Testing the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire on cancer patients with heterogeneous diagnoses. Quality of Life Research, 2, 129–140.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Huang, C. C., Lien, H. H., Wang, P. C., Yang, J. C., Cheng, C. Y., & Huang, C. S. (2007). Quality of life in disease-free adenocarcinoma survivors: Impacts of clinical stages and reconstructive surgical procedures. Digestive Surgery, 24, 59–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Smith, A. B., Cocks, K., Taylor, M., & Parry, D. (2014). Most domains of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 are reliable. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67, 952–957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2006). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Bentler, P. M., & Yuan, K. H. (1999). Structural equation modeling with small samples: Test statistics. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34, 181–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Chen, F. F., West, S. G., & Sousa, K. H. (2006). A comparison of bifactor and second-order models of quality of life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 189–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The work was supported in part by Cathay Medical Research Institute grant MR10208 and National Science Council grant NSC-102-2314-B-281-003-MY3 and MOST-103-2314-B-281-004-MY2.

Conflict of interest

All authors declared no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cathay General Hospital SiJhih, New Taipei City, Taiwan

    Chi-Cheng Huang

  2. School of Medicine, Fu-Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City, Taiwan

    Chi-Cheng Huang & Heng-Hui Lien

  3. School of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei City, Taiwan

    Chi-Cheng Huang, Shih-Hsin Tu & Ching-Shui Huang

  4. Department of Surgery, Cathay General Hospital, Taipei City, Taiwan

    Shih-Hsin Tu, Heng-Hui Lien & Ching-Shui Huang

  5. Quality Management Center, Cathay General Hospital, Taipei City, Taiwan

    Pa-Chun Wang

  6. Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei City, Taiwan

    Wei-Chu Chie

Authors
  1. Chi-Cheng Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shih-Hsin Tu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Heng-Hui Lien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ching-Shui Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pa-Chun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Wei-Chu Chie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei-Chu Chie.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 27 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Huang, CC., Tu, SH., Lien, HH. et al. Conceptual structure of the Taiwan Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res 24, 1999–2013 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0913-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0913-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation