Validation of the cancer needs questionnaire (CNQ) short-form version in an ambulatory cancer setting
- 407 Downloads
The short-form Cancer Needs Questionnaire (CNQ) is a self-administered cancer-specific questionnaire designed to assess patients' needs across several domains. The purpose of this study is to further evaluate its internal consistency and construct validity, in a group of ambulatory patients with cancer. Four hundred and fifty patients with a variety of cancer types participated. Factor analysis reproduced five domains: psychological; health information; physical and daily living; patient care and support; and interpersonal communication needs. Cronbach's α coefficients ranged from 0.94 to 0.77, indicating substantial consistency across items grouped in the five domains. A priori predictions regarding convergent and contrasting groups construct validity were explored using bivariate relationships between domains of the short-form CNQ, the EORTC QLQC-30 and Beck Depression Inventory (short-form), with support provided for most of the predictions. The current study provides supportive evidence that the short-form CNQ is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the needs of patients with cancer in an ambulatory care setting.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia's health 2000: The seventh biennial health report of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2000.Google Scholar
- 4.Lattimore-Foot GG. Needs assessment in tertiary and secondary oncology practice: A conceptual and methodological exposition. Newcastle: University of Newcastle, 1996.Google Scholar
- 7.Girgis A, Boyes A, Sanson-Fisher R, Burrows S. Perceived needs of women diagnosed with breast cancer: Rural versus urban location. Aust NZJ Pub Health 2000; 24: 166–173.Google Scholar
- 9.Bonevski B, Sanson-Fisher R, Hersey P, Paul C, Foot G. Assessing the perceived needs of patients attending an outpatient melanoma clinic. J Psychosoc Oncol 1999; 17: 101–118.Google Scholar
- 12.Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. for the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Study Group of Quality of Life. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQC30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Nat Cancer Inst, 1993; 85: 365–376.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.McLachlan S, Devins GM, Goodwin PJ. Validation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) as a measure of psychosocial function in breast cancer patients. Eur J Cancer Care 1998; 34: 510–517.Google Scholar
- 15.Osoba D, Zee B, Pater J, Warr D, Kaizer L, Latreille J. Psychometric properties and responsiveness of the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) in patients with breast, ovarian and lung cancer. Qual Life Res 1994; 3.Google Scholar
- 18.Murphy KR, Davidshofer CO. Psychological Testing. Principles and Applications. 3rd ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. 1994.Google Scholar
- 20.Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. 3rd ed. Northridge: HarperCollins College Publishers 1996.Google Scholar
- 23.Bilodeau BA, Degner LF. Information needs, sources of information, and decisional roles in women with breast cancer. Oncol Nursing Forum 1996; 23: 691–696.Google Scholar
- 25.Foot G, Sanson-Fisher R. Measuring the unmet needs of people living with cancer. Cancer Forum 1995; 19: 131–135.Google Scholar
- 26.Nunnally JC. Psychometric Theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill 1978.Google Scholar