nach oben

Quality of Life Research

Erschienen in:

01.12.2014

Assessing the invariance of a culturally competent multi-lingual unmet needs survey for immigrant and Australian-born cancer patients: a Rasch analysis

verfasst von: J. A. McGrane, P. N. Butow, M. Sze, M. Eisenbruch, D. Goldstein, M. T. King

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 10/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess the invariance of a culturally competent multi-lingual unmet needs survey.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted among immigrants of Arabic-, Chinese- and Greek-speaking backgrounds, and Anglo-Australian-born controls, recruited through Cancer Registries (n = 591) and oncology clinics (n = 900). The survey included four subscales, with newly developed items addressing unmet need in culturally competent health information and patient support (CCHIPS), and items adapted from existing questionnaires addressing physical and daily living (PDL), sexuality (SEX) and survivorship (SURV) unmet need. The survey was translated into Arabic, Chinese and Greek. Rasch analysis was carried out on the four domains.

Results

Whilst many items were mistargeted to less prevalent areas of unmet need, causing substantial floor effects in person estimates, reliability indices were acceptable. The CCHIPS domain showed differential item functioning (DIF) for cultural background and language, and the PDL domain showed DIF for treatment phase and gender. The results for SEX and SURV domains were limited by floor effects and missing responses. All domains showed adequate fit to the model after DIF was resolved and a small number of items were deleted.

Conclusions

The study highlights the intricacies in designing a culturally competent survey that can be applied to culturally and linguistically diverse groups across different treatment contexts. Overall, the results demonstrate that this survey is somewhat invariant with respect to these factors. Future refinements are suggested to enhance the survey’s cultural competence and general validity.

Bonevski, B., Sanson-Fisher, R., Girgis, A., Burton, L., Cook, P., et al. (2000). Evaluation of an instrument to assess the needs of patients with cancer. Supportive care review group. Cancer, 88(1), 217–225.PubMedCrossRef

Au, A., Lam, W. W., Kwong, A., Suen, D., Tsang, J., et al. (2011). Validation of the Chinese version of the short-form Supportive Care Needs Survey Questionnaire (SCNS-SF34-C). Psycho-Oncology, 20(12), 1292–1300.PubMedCrossRef

Boyes, A., Girgis, A., & Lecathelinais, C. (2009). Brief assessment of adult cancer patients’ perceived needs: Development and validation of the 34-item Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS-SF34). Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 15(4), 602–606.PubMedCrossRef

Hodgkinson, K., Butow, P., Hunt, G. E., Pendlebury, S., Hobbs, K. M., et al. (2007). The development and evaluation of a measure to assess cancer survivors’ unmet supportive care needs: The CaSUN (Cancer Survivors’ Unmet Needs measure). Psycho-Oncology, 16(9), 796–804.PubMedCrossRef

Chu, K. C., Miller, B. A., & Springfield, S. A. (2007). Measures of racial/ethnic health disparities in cancer mortality rates and the influence of socioeconomic status. Journal of the National Medical Association, 99(10), 1092–1104.PubMedCentralPubMed

Colagiuri, B., King, M. T., Butow, P. N., McGrane, J. A., Luckett, T., et al. (2012). A comparison of the FACT-G and the Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS) in women with ovarian cancer: Unidimensionality of constructs. Quality of Life Research, 21(5), 887–897.PubMedCrossRef

Butow, P. N., Sze, M., Duggal-Beri, P., Mikhail, M., Eisenbruch, M., et al. (2011). From inside the bubble: Migrants’ perceptions of communication with the cancer team. Supportive Care in Cancer, 19(2), 281–290.CrossRef

Goldstein, D., Thewes, B., & Butow, P. (2002). Communicating in a multicultural society. II: Greek community attitudes towards cancer in Australia. Internal Medicine Journal, 32(7), 289–296.PubMedCrossRef

Moore, R., & Butow, P. (2005). Culture and oncology: Impact of context effects. In D. Speigel (Ed.), Cancer, communication and culture. New York: Kluwer Academic.

10.

Ali, N. S., Khalil, H. Z., & Yousef, W. (1993). A comparison of American and Egyptian cancer patients’ attitudes and unmet needs. Cancer Nursing, 16(3), 193–203.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Guthrie, B. (2005). Bridging health care disparities: Addressing unmet needs of women of color. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing, 34(3), 385.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Custers, J. W., Hoijtink, H., van der Net, J., & Helders, P. J. (2000). Cultural differences in functional status measurement: Analyses of person fit according to the Rasch model. Quality of Life Research, 9(5), 571–578.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Tennant, A., Penta, M., Tesio, L., Grimby, G., Thonnard, J.-L., et al. (2004). Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: The PRO-ESOR project. Medical Care, 42(1), I37–I48.PubMed

14.

Pallant, J. F., & Tennant, A. (2007). An introduction to the Rasch measurement model: An example using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 46, 1–18.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Andrich, D. (1988). Rasch models for measurement. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications Inc.

16.

Pagano, I. S., & Gotay, C. C. (2005). Ethnic differential item functioning in the assessment of quality of life in cancer patients. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 3(1), 60.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

17.

Teresi, J. A., & Fleishman, J. A. (2007). Differential item functioning and health assessment. Quality of Life Research, 16(1), 33–42.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Tesio, L., & Tennant, A. (2005). Psychometric properties of the mini-mental state examination in patients with acquired brain injury in Turkey. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 37, 306–311.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Geyh, S., Fellinghauer, B., Kirchberger, I., & Post, M. (2010). Cross-cultural validity of four quality of life scales in persons with spinal cord injury. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8, 94.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

20.

Choi, Y., Mericle, A., & Harachi, T. W. (2006). Using Rasch analysis to test the cross-cultural item equivalence of the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist across Vietnamese and Cambodian immigrant mothers. Journal of Applied Measurement, 7(1), 16.PubMedCentralPubMed

21.

Baranik, L. E., Meade, A. W., Lakey, C. E., Lance, C. E., Hu, C., et al. (2008). Examining the differential item functioning of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale across eight countries. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(7), 1867–1904.CrossRef

22.

Zumbo, B. D. (2003). Does item-level DIF manifest itself in scale-level analyses? Implications for translating language tests. Language Testing, 20(2), 136–147.CrossRef

23.

Salzberger, T., Sinkovics, R. R., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. (1999). Data equivalence in cross-cultural research: A comparison of classical test theory and latent trait theory based approaches. Australasian Marketing Journal, 7(2), 23–38.CrossRef

24.

Butow, P. N., Bell, M., Aldridge, L. J., Sze, M., Eisenbruch, M., et al. (2013). Unmet needs in immigrant cancer survivors: A cross-sectional population based study. Supportive Care in Cancer, 21, 2509–2520.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Bell, M. L., Butow, P. N., and Goldstein, D. (2013). Informatively missing quality of life and unmet needs sex data for immigrant and Anglo-Australian cancer patients and survivors. Quality of Life Research, 22(10), 1–4.

26.

Schuman, H. (1966). The random probe: A technique for evaluating the validity of closed questions. American Sociological Review, 31(2), 218–222.

27.

Andrich, D., Sheridan, B., & Luo, G. (2010). Rasch models for measurement: RUMM2030. Perth, Western Australia: RUMM Laboratory.

28.

Chen, W.-H., Lenderking, W., Jin, Y., Wyrwich, K., Gelhorn, H., et al. (2014). Is Rasch model analysis applicable in small sample size pilot studies for assessing item characteristics? An example using PROMIS pain behavior item bank data. Quality of Life Research, 23(2), 485–493.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Linacre, M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7, 328.

30.

Marais, I., & Andrich, D. (2008). Effects of varying magnitude and patterns of response dependence in the unidimensional Rasch model. Journal of Applied Measurement, 9(2), 105–124.PubMed

31.

Andrich, D., & Hagquist, C. (2012). Real and artificial differential item functioning. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 37(3), 387–416.CrossRef

32.

Marais, I., & Andrich, D. (2008). Formalising dimension and response violations of local independence in the unidimensional Rasch model. Journal of Applied Measurement, 9(3), 200–215.PubMed

33.

Scott, N. W., Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bottomley, A., Graeff, A., et al. (2007). The use of differential item functioning analyses to identify cultural differences in responses to the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research, 16(1), 115–129.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Andrich, D. (2005). The Rasch model explained. In S. Alagumalai, D. Durtis, & N. Hungi (Eds.), Applied Rasch measurement: A book of exemplars (pp. 308–328). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

35.

McKenna, S. P., Wilburn, J., Thorsen, H., & Brodersen, J. (2012). Adapting patient-reported outcome measures for use in new languages and cultures. In K. B. Christensen, S. Kreiner, & M. Mesbah (Eds.), Rasch models in health (pp. 303–315). London, UK: Wiley.

36.

Petersen, M. A., Groenvold, M., Bjorner, J. B., Aaronson, N., Conroy, T., et al. (2003). Use of differential item functioning analysis to assess the equivalence of translations of a questionnaire. Quality of Life Research, 12(4), 373–385.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Gershon, R., Cella, D., Dineen, K., Rosenbloom, S., Peterman, A., et al. (2003). Item response theory and health-related quality of life in cancer. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 3(6), 783–791.PubMedCrossRef

38.

ABS, Australian Social Trends (4102.0). A.B.o. Statistics, Editor 2010, AGPS: Canberra.

39.

Hobart, J. C. (2003). Rating scales for neurologists. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 74, 22–26.CrossRef

40.

Flynn, K. E., Jeffery, D. D., Keefe, F. J., Porter, L. S., Shelby, R. A., et al. (2011). Sexual functioning along the cancer continuum: Focus group results from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS^®). Psycho-Oncology, 20(4), 378–386.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

41.

Borsboom, D. (2006). When does measurement invariance matter? Commentary. Medical Care, 44(11), S176–S181.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Assessing the invariance of a culturally competent multi-lingual unmet needs survey for immigrant and Australian-born cancer patients: a Rasch analysis
verfasst von: J. A. McGrane
P. N. Butow
M. Sze
M. Eisenbruch
D. Goldstein
M. T. King
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2014
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 10/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0717-5

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2014

Emotional vitality in family caregivers: content validation of a theoretical framework

Assessing the validity of single-item life satisfaction measures: results from three large samples

Discriminatory power of a 25-item distress screening tool: a cross-sectional survey of 251 cancer survivors

Psychometric properties and Dutch norm data of the PedsQL Multidimensional Fatigue Scale for Young Adults

Health status profiles in community-dwelling elderly using self-reported health indicators: a latent class analysis

Effect of perioperative complications and functional outcomes on health-related quality of life after radical prostatectomy