A 'short walk' is longer before radiotherapy than afterwards: a qualitative study questioning the baseline and follow-up design
Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift effects. This is the first known study to qualitatively examine the assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL...
Saved in:
Published in | Health and quality of life outcomes Vol. 8; no. 1; p. 69 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
England
BioMed Central Ltd
16.07.2010
BioMed Central BMC |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift effects. This is the first known study to qualitatively examine the assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time. Specific objectives are to examine whether the content of each distinct cognitive process underlying QoL appraisal is (dis)similar over time and whether patterns of (dis)similarity can be discerned across and within patients and/or items.
We conducted cognitive think-aloud interviews with 50 cancer patients prior to and following radiotherapy to elicit cognitive processes underlying the assessment of 7 EORTC QLQ-C30 items. Qualitative analysis of patients' responses at baseline and follow-up was independently carried out by 2 researchers by means of an analysis scheme based on the cognitive process models of Tourangeau et al. and Rapkin & Schwartz.
The interviews yielded 342 comparisons of baseline and follow-up responses, which were analyzed according to the five cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal. The content of comprehension/frame of reference changed in 188 comparisons; retrieval/sampling strategy in 246; standards of comparison in 152; judgment/combinatory algorithm in 113; and reporting and response selection in 141 comparisons. Overall, in 322 comparisons of responses (94%) the content of at least one cognitive component changed over time. We could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity since the content of each of the cognitive processes differed across and within patients and/or items. Additionally, differences found in the content of a cognitive process for one item was not found to influence dissimilarity in the content of that same cognitive process for the subsequent item.
The assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time was not found to be in line with the cognitive processes described by the respondents. Additionally, we could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity across and within patients and/or items. In building on cognitive process models and the response shift literature, this study contributes to a better understanding of patient-reported QoL appraisal over time. |
---|---|
AbstractList | BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift effects. This is the first known study to qualitatively examine the assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time. Specific objectives are to examine whether the content of each distinct cognitive process underlying QoL appraisal is (dis)similar over time and whether patterns of (dis)similarity can be discerned across and within patients and/or items. METHODS: We conducted cognitive think-aloud interviews with 50 cancer patients prior to and following radiotherapy to elicit cognitive processes underlying the assessment of 7 EORTC QLQ-C30 items. Qualitative analysis of patients' responses at baseline and follow-up was independently carried out by 2 researchers by means of an analysis scheme based on the cognitive process models of Tourangeau et al. and Rapkin & Schwartz. RESULTS: The interviews yielded 342 comparisons of baseline and follow-up responses, which were analyzed according to the five cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal. The content of comprehension/frame of reference changed in 188 comparisons; retrieval/sampling strategy in 246; standards of comparison in 152; judgment/combinatory algorithm in 113; and reporting and response selection in 141 comparisons. Overall, in 322 comparisons of responses (94%) the content of at least one cognitive component changed over time. We could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity since the content of each of the cognitive processes differed across and within patients and/or items. Additionally, differences found in the content of a cognitive process for one item was not found to influence dissimilarity in the content of that same cognitive process for the subsequent item. CONCLUSIONS: The assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time was not found to be in line with the cognitive processes described by the respondents. Additionally, we could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity across and within patients and/or items. In building on cognitive process models and the response shift literature, this study contributes to a better understanding of patient-reported QoL appraisal over time. BACKGROUNDNumerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift effects. This is the first known study to qualitatively examine the assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time. Specific objectives are to examine whether the content of each distinct cognitive process underlying QoL appraisal is (dis)similar over time and whether patterns of (dis)similarity can be discerned across and within patients and/or items. METHODSWe conducted cognitive think-aloud interviews with 50 cancer patients prior to and following radiotherapy to elicit cognitive processes underlying the assessment of 7 EORTC QLQ-C30 items. Qualitative analysis of patients' responses at baseline and follow-up was independently carried out by 2 researchers by means of an analysis scheme based on the cognitive process models of Tourangeau et al. and Rapkin & Schwartz. RESULTSThe interviews yielded 342 comparisons of baseline and follow-up responses, which were analyzed according to the five cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal. The content of comprehension/frame of reference changed in 188 comparisons; retrieval/sampling strategy in 246; standards of comparison in 152; judgment/combinatory algorithm in 113; and reporting and response selection in 141 comparisons. Overall, in 322 comparisons of responses (94%) the content of at least one cognitive component changed over time. We could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity since the content of each of the cognitive processes differed across and within patients and/or items. Additionally, differences found in the content of a cognitive process for one item was not found to influence dissimilarity in the content of that same cognitive process for the subsequent item. CONCLUSIONSThe assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time was not found to be in line with the cognitive processes described by the respondents. Additionally, we could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity across and within patients and/or items. In building on cognitive process models and the response shift literature, this study contributes to a better understanding of patient-reported QoL appraisal over time. Background Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift effects. This is the first known study to qualitatively examine the assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time. Specific objectives are to examine whether the content of each distinct cognitive process underlying QoL appraisal is (dis)similar over time and whether patterns of (dis)similarity can be discerned across and within patients and/or items. Methods We conducted cognitive think-aloud interviews with 50 cancer patients prior to and following radiotherapy to elicit cognitive processes underlying the assessment of 7 EORTC QLQ-C30 items. Qualitative analysis of patients' responses at baseline and follow-up was independently carried out by 2 researchers by means of an analysis scheme based on the cognitive process models of Tourangeau et al. and Rapkin and Schwartz. Results The interviews yielded 342 comparisons of baseline and follow-up responses, which were analyzed according to the five cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal. The content of comprehension/frame of reference changed in 188 comparisons; retrieval/sampling strategy in 246; standards of comparison in 152; judgment/combinatory algorithm in 113; and reporting and response selection in 141 comparisons. Overall, in 322 comparisons of responses (94%) the content of at least one cognitive component changed over time. We could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity since the content of each of the cognitive processes differed across and within patients and/or items. Additionally, differences found in the content of a cognitive process for one item was not found to influence dissimilarity in the content of that same cognitive process for the subsequent item. Conclusions The assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time was not found to be in line with the cognitive processes described by the respondents. Additionally, we could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity across and within patients and/or items. In building on cognitive process models and the response shift literature, this study contributes to a better understanding of patient-reported QoL appraisal over time. Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift effects. This is the first known study to qualitatively examine the assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time. Specific objectives are to examine whether the content of each distinct cognitive process underlying QoL appraisal is (dis)similar over time and whether patterns of (dis)similarity can be discerned across and within patients and/or items. We conducted cognitive think-aloud interviews with 50 cancer patients prior to and following radiotherapy to elicit cognitive processes underlying the assessment of 7 EORTC QLQ-C30 items. Qualitative analysis of patients' responses at baseline and follow-up was independently carried out by 2 researchers by means of an analysis scheme based on the cognitive process models of Tourangeau et al. and Rapkin and Schwartz. The interviews yielded 342 comparisons of baseline and follow-up responses, which were analyzed according to the five cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal. The content of comprehension/frame of reference changed in 188 comparisons; retrieval/sampling strategy in 246; standards of comparison in 152; judgment/combinatory algorithm in 113; and reporting and response selection in 141 comparisons. Overall, in 322 comparisons of responses (94%) the content of at least one cognitive component changed over time. We could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity since the content of each of the cognitive processes differed across and within patients and/or items. Additionally, differences found in the content of a cognitive process for one item was not found to influence dissimilarity in the content of that same cognitive process for the subsequent item. The assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time was not found to be in line with the cognitive processes described by the respondents. Additionally, we could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity across and within patients and/or items. In building on cognitive process models and the response shift literature, this study contributes to a better understanding of patient-reported QoL appraisal over time. Abstract Background Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift effects. This is the first known study to qualitatively examine the assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time. Specific objectives are to examine whether the content of each distinct cognitive process underlying QoL appraisal is (dis)similar over time and whether patterns of (dis)similarity can be discerned across and within patients and/or items. Methods We conducted cognitive think-aloud interviews with 50 cancer patients prior to and following radiotherapy to elicit cognitive processes underlying the assessment of 7 EORTC QLQ-C30 items. Qualitative analysis of patients' responses at baseline and follow-up was independently carried out by 2 researchers by means of an analysis scheme based on the cognitive process models of Tourangeau et al. and Rapkin & Schwartz. Results The interviews yielded 342 comparisons of baseline and follow-up responses, which were analyzed according to the five cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal. The content of comprehension/frame of reference changed in 188 comparisons; retrieval/sampling strategy in 246; standards of comparison in 152; judgment/combinatory algorithm in 113; and reporting and response selection in 141 comparisons. Overall, in 322 comparisons of responses (94%) the content of at least one cognitive component changed over time. We could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity since the content of each of the cognitive processes differed across and within patients and/or items. Additionally, differences found in the content of a cognitive process for one item was not found to influence dissimilarity in the content of that same cognitive process for the subsequent item. Conclusions The assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time was not found to be in line with the cognitive processes described by the respondents. Additionally, we could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity across and within patients and/or items. In building on cognitive process models and the response shift literature, this study contributes to a better understanding of patient-reported QoL appraisal over time. Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift effects. This is the first known study to qualitatively examine the assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time. Specific objectives are to examine whether the content of each distinct cognitive process underlying QoL appraisal is (dis)similar over time and whether patterns of (dis)similarity can be discerned across and within patients and/or items. We conducted cognitive think-aloud interviews with 50 cancer patients prior to and following radiotherapy to elicit cognitive processes underlying the assessment of 7 EORTC QLQ-C30 items. Qualitative analysis of patients' responses at baseline and follow-up was independently carried out by 2 researchers by means of an analysis scheme based on the cognitive process models of Tourangeau et al. and Rapkin & Schwartz. The interviews yielded 342 comparisons of baseline and follow-up responses, which were analyzed according to the five cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal. The content of comprehension/frame of reference changed in 188 comparisons; retrieval/sampling strategy in 246; standards of comparison in 152; judgment/combinatory algorithm in 113; and reporting and response selection in 141 comparisons. Overall, in 322 comparisons of responses (94%) the content of at least one cognitive component changed over time. We could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity since the content of each of the cognitive processes differed across and within patients and/or items. Additionally, differences found in the content of a cognitive process for one item was not found to influence dissimilarity in the content of that same cognitive process for the subsequent item. The assumption of consistency in the content of the cognitive processes underlying QoL appraisal over time was not found to be in line with the cognitive processes described by the respondents. Additionally, we could not discern patterns of (dis)similarity across and within patients and/or items. In building on cognitive process models and the response shift literature, this study contributes to a better understanding of patient-reported QoL appraisal over time. |
Audience | Academic |
Author | Koning, Caro C E Rapkin, Bruce D Koeneman, Margot A Visser, Mechteld R M van Zuuren, Florence J Sprangers, Mirjam A G Taminiau-Bloem, Elsbeth F |
AuthorAffiliation | 5 Department of Radiotherapy, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 1 Department of Medical Psychology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2 Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 4 Department of General Practice, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 3 Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, USA |
AuthorAffiliation_xml | – name: 5 Department of Radiotherapy, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands – name: 2 Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands – name: 4 Department of General Practice, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands – name: 3 Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, USA – name: 1 Department of Medical Psychology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Elsbeth F surname: Taminiau-Bloem fullname: Taminiau-Bloem, Elsbeth F email: e.f.bloem@amc.uva.nl organization: Department of Medical Psychology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. e.f.bloem@amc.uva.nl – sequence: 2 givenname: Florence J surname: van Zuuren fullname: van Zuuren, Florence J – sequence: 3 givenname: Margot A surname: Koeneman fullname: Koeneman, Margot A – sequence: 4 givenname: Bruce D surname: Rapkin fullname: Rapkin, Bruce D – sequence: 5 givenname: Mechteld R M surname: Visser fullname: Visser, Mechteld R M – sequence: 6 givenname: Caro C E surname: Koning fullname: Koning, Caro C E – sequence: 7 givenname: Mirjam A G surname: Sprangers fullname: Sprangers, Mirjam A G |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20637086$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNp1kstrGzEQxpeS0jzaa49F0IPpYVPtah_aHgIm9GEIFPo4i5E0u1a6llxJm9Sn_uuV49TENEUHiW---aF5nGZH1lnMspcFPS8K3rwtqrbN27qsc5433ZPsZC8cPXgfZ6chXFNasrKsn2XHJW1YS3lzkv2ek1lYOh_JLYw_ZsQEMjo7oCcSe-eReNDGxSV6WG9IXIIl0Ef0t-B1eEeA_JxgNBGiuUES4qQ3ScEQjbPGDikBiYSAo7FIwGrSu3F0t_m0JhqDGezz7GkPY8AX9_dZ9v3D-2-Xn_Krzx8Xl_OrXDZFFXNguq0V5x0wCarvGQetGkp7RSXrZau2gaapleoZQ1pLzasSNC0rRZHJgp1lix1XO7gWa29W4DfCgRF3gvODAB-NGlGg7LDrmo63qCpdas6KuuIVp63WtaxkYl3sWOtJrlArtNHDeAA9jFizFIO7EWVX1F1bJsB8B5DG_QdwGFFuJbbDFNthCi6aLjFm95_w7q7jYmWCwnEEi24Koq14V1NWseR8vXMOkKoztneJqbZuMS8Zq5uSsia5zh9xpaNxZVRaut4k_SDhzUFC8kT8FQeYQhCLr18ehSvvQvDY72stqNju8b_VvXrY4r397-KyPy_k8Wk |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1016_j_apmr_2013_08_009 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_msard_2012_07_006 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11136_023_03347_8 crossref_primary_10_1080_08870446_2011_596203 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jclinepi_2019_09_028 crossref_primary_10_1097_DCR_0b013e3182686213 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11136_016_1423_2 crossref_primary_10_1093_humrep_der021 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12955_022_01926_w crossref_primary_10_1007_s11136_017_1633_2 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11136_019_02282_x crossref_primary_10_1007_s11136_015_1175_4 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11136_021_02961_8 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | COPYRIGHT 2010 BioMed Central Ltd. Copyright ©2010 Taminiau-Bloem et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010 Taminiau-Bloem et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: COPYRIGHT 2010 BioMed Central Ltd. – notice: Copyright ©2010 Taminiau-Bloem et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010 Taminiau-Bloem et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. |
DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM AAYXX CITATION ISR 7X8 5PM DOA |
DOI | 10.1186/1477-7525-8-69 |
DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed CrossRef Gale In Context: Science MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) CrossRef MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Public Health |
EISSN | 1477-7525 |
EndPage | 69 |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_eb9e996987ec4d2d8315484807dd5b4b oai_biomedcentral_com_1477_7525_8_69 A233562036 10_1186_1477_7525_8_69 20637086 |
Genre | Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Journal Article |
GeographicLocations | United States Netherlands |
GeographicLocations_xml | – name: Netherlands – name: United States |
GroupedDBID | --- -A0 0R~ 29I 2VQ 2WC 3V. 4.4 44B 53G 5VS 7X7 7XC 88E 8C1 8FE 8FH 8FI 8FJ AAFWJ AAJSJ AAWTL ABDBF ABUWG ACGFO ACGFS ACHQT ACPRK ACRMQ ADBBV ADINQ ADRAZ ADUKV AENEX AFKRA AFPKN AFRAH AHBYD AHMBA AHSBF AHYZX ALIPV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMKLP AMTXH AOIJS ATCPS BAPOH BAWUL BCNDV BENPR BFQNJ BHPHI BMC BPHCQ BVXVI C1A C24 C6C CCPQU CGR CS3 CUY CVF DIK DU5 E3Z EAD EAP EAS EBD EBLON EBS ECM EIF EJD EMB EMK EMOBN ESX F5P FRP FYUFA GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 H13 HCIFZ HMCUK HYE IAO IHR INH INR IPNFZ IPY ISR ITC KQ8 M1P M48 M~E NPM O5R O5S OK1 P2P PATMY PGMZT PIMPY PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO PYCSY RBZ RIG RNS ROL RPM RSV SMD SOJ SV3 TR2 TUS UKHRP W2D WOQ WOW XSB AAYXX CITATION AFGXO ABVAZ AFNRJ 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-b614t-a3d75c889a3bacff38adc600fc0b3fb7c9a3b665ccf33e05bd842ad024c0e3b13 |
IEDL.DBID | RBZ |
ISSN | 1477-7525 |
IngestDate | Tue Oct 22 15:04:12 EDT 2024 Tue Sep 17 21:16:25 EDT 2024 Wed May 22 07:10:41 EDT 2024 Fri Oct 25 22:20:54 EDT 2024 Fri Feb 23 00:16:57 EST 2024 Fri Feb 02 04:05:03 EST 2024 Thu Aug 01 20:13:04 EDT 2024 Fri Sep 13 09:26:43 EDT 2024 Sat Sep 28 07:51:24 EDT 2024 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 1 |
Language | English |
License | This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-b614t-a3d75c889a3bacff38adc600fc0b3fb7c9a3b665ccf33e05bd842ad024c0e3b13 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
OpenAccessLink | http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-8-69 |
PMID | 20637086 |
PQID | 748950343 |
PQPubID | 23479 |
ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_eb9e996987ec4d2d8315484807dd5b4b pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2915972 biomedcentral_primary_oai_biomedcentral_com_1477_7525_8_69 proquest_miscellaneous_748950343 gale_infotracmisc_A233562036 gale_infotracacademiconefile_A233562036 gale_incontextgauss_ISR_A233562036 crossref_primary_10_1186_1477_7525_8_69 pubmed_primary_20637086 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2010-07-16 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2010-07-16 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 07 year: 2010 text: 2010-07-16 day: 16 |
PublicationDecade | 2010 |
PublicationPlace | England |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: England |
PublicationTitle | Health and quality of life outcomes |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Health Qual Life Outcomes |
PublicationYear | 2010 |
Publisher | BioMed Central Ltd BioMed Central BMC |
Publisher_xml | – name: BioMed Central Ltd – name: BioMed Central – name: BMC |
References | 16111061 - Palliat Med. 2005 Jul;19(5):381-8 16328904 - Qual Life Res. 2005 Dec;14(10):2247-57 15799784 - Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:21 11820675 - Soc Sci Med. 2002 Jan;54(1):11-21 15023229 - Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004 Mar 15;2:14 12565977 - Eur J Cancer. 2003 Feb;39(3):275-85 10400253 - Soc Sci Med. 1999 Jun;48(11):1507-15 12065262 - BMJ. 2002 Jun 15;324(7351):1417 17942496 - Palliat Med. 2007 Oct;21(7):581-6 11236851 - Qual Life Res. 2000;9(6):603-15 1301129 - Qual Life Res. 1992 Jun;1(3):211-8 18704756 - Qual Life Res. 2008 Oct;17(8):1093-102 8433390 - J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 Mar 3;85(5):365-76 19139138 - BMJ. 2009;338:a3006 17307086 - Lancet. 2007 Feb 17;369(9561):540-2 11809356 - J Clin Epidemiol. 2002 Feb;55(2):176-83 16022057 - Qual Life Res. 2005 Apr;14(3):629-39 16043345 - Eur J Cancer. 2005 Aug;41(12):1697-709 12769134 - Qual Life Res. 2003 May;12(3):219-27 17884598 - J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Oct;60(10):1034-9 16125516 - J Psychosom Res. 2005 Jun;58(6):497-504 10474852 - Psychooncology. 1999 Jul-Aug;8(4):344-54 16809741 - J Clin Oncol. 2006 Jul 1;24(19):3178-86 |
References_xml | |
SSID | ssj0023225 |
Score | 2.0590563 |
Snippet | Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift effects. This... Background Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift... BACKGROUNDNumerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift... BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing response-shift... Abstract Background Numerous studies have indirectly demonstrated changes in the content of respondents' QoL appraisal process over time by revealing... |
SourceID | doaj pubmedcentral biomedcentral proquest gale crossref pubmed |
SourceType | Open Website Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database |
StartPage | 69 |
SubjectTerms | Cognition Follow-Up Studies Health aspects Humans Interviews as Topic Models, Psychological Patient outcomes Qualitative Research Quality of life Quality of Life - psychology Radiotherapy Research Design Time Factors Walking |
SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals dbid: DOA link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1La9wwEBYlp0ApfddpWkQp7EnEa9mWnNs2NKSF9tA2kJvQs1m62CHeJfTUv94ZybusyKGXXjWykTQjzTdi5hMh70PbyaCDZFa2JavBAbNOastcbY2DcMNVkUj7y9f24rL-fNVc7T31hTlhiR44LdyJN50HTA6hsbe1q5zkCLKxENq5xtQmnr5ltw2mplALzTTWFQnBRFM1E13jXLYnuzYmGaY5Z3Xuq8w9RRb_-2f1nrPKEyn3PNP5Y_JogpR0kabyhDzw_VPyMN3H0VRm9Iz8WdDZeA1Ym97p1a8ZXY50NeCNHjUecKunt9otp2qs3xTv02l8PhyTasdTqmmqvow04TRy0tI4ynSdCx94ig4RQSvVvaMB7Gu4Y5sb6mKOyHNyef7xx9kFmx5fYAY89ppp7kRjpew0N9qGwKV2FtBRsKXhwQiLgrZtrA2c-7IxTtaVduDybem5mfMX5KAfev-KUGEsgNDKOl7K2geH2uQAveBPtTaNLchppgN1k4g2FFJf5xLYhQoVqFCBSqq2K8hsq7DddzGwke29nh9Qn9nfYwOYm5rMTf3L3AryDq1BIXVGj7k5P_VmHNWn79_UouIc0CRAAhjT1CkMMGyrp1IHWA5k28p6Hmc9YW_bTEy3RqdQhAlxvR82o0LSoKbkNS_Iy2SDu3lVgDoFRKoFEZl1ZhPPJf3yOjKLVx2gW1Ed_Y-Vek0OU6aFYPP2mBysbzf-DQC4tXkb9-pfBKVE7A priority: 102 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals – databaseName: PubMed Central dbid: RPM link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1La9wwEBZJToVS-u62aRGlkJOyXsu25Ny2oSEtpJS2gdyEnsmSjb2sdwk99a93RrZDRG69eiQz9nzjmREznwn5FKpaBh0ks7LKWAEBmNVSW-YKaxyUGy6PRNpn36vT8-LbRXmxQ8pxFiY27VuzOGyWN4fN4ir2Vq5u7HTsE5v-ODvOawjCIp_ukl0A6FiiD1UWInRgZ5zJajorhGCizEsmWYUcoTkEZZHh7HQy4b5MAlPk73_4lb4XptIWynsx6eQpeTIkk3TeK_2M7PjmOXncn8TRfsDoBfk7pwfdFWTZ9FYvrw_ooqPLFs_yqPGQsXq61m4xzGH9oXiSTuOPw7GdtjuimvZzl5EgnEY2Whq17A9yYYOnGAoxXaW6cTQAstpbtl1RF7tDXpLzky-_j0_Z8NsFZiBWb5jmTpRWylpzo20IXGpnIS8KNjM8GGFRUFWltYFzn5XGySLXDoK9zTw3M_6K7DVt498QKoyF9DO3jmey8MHVgAwOSRfcqdCmtBNylNhArXqKDYWk16kE_E-hLRXaUklV1RNyMBrsbl8saWT1YOVntGdy93ihXV-qAVjKm9rXqKDwtnC5kxyrOZy4d640hZmQj4gGhaQZDXblXOpt16mvv36qec455JGQDIBOw6LQgtpWD0MO8DqQZytZuZ-sBK-2iZiOoFMowla4xrfbTiFdUJnxgk_I6x6Dd881QntCRILO5MFTCbhY5BQfXOrtf-98Rx71jRWCzap9srdZb_17yNc25kP0z39L-kON priority: 500 providerName: National Library of Medicine – databaseName: Scholars Portal Open Access Journals dbid: M48 link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3db9MwELdgvCAhxPc6BrIQUp8Mqe0kziSECmIaSPAAVNqb5a9sFVWyNa3GnvjXuXOyMlPeeO3ZkZ276_3OufuZkJd1Uana1Io5VWRMQgBmlTKOeemsh3TD80ik_flLcTSTn47z4z_1T8ML7P6Z2uF9UrPl4tXP88u34PBvosOr4vVEliUrc54zxYrqJrnFJWTpWMYnN18UOBpu7DQaxg4Ejtvz_-p8XyQBK_L6b_97XwtfaWnltVh1eI_cHUAmnfZWcZ_cCM0Dcqc_oaN949FD8mtKx90pbJxemMWPMZ13dNHiGR-1AZBsoEvj50N_1iXFE3YaLxTHMtvugBra92NG4nAaWWppXGV_wAsTAsUQiTCWmsbTGiyuvWDrM-pj1cgjMjv88P39ERuuY2AWYviKGeHL3ClVGWGNq2uhjHeAl2qXWVHb0qGgKHLnaiFClluvJDceQIDLgrAT8ZjsNG0TdgktrQNYyp0XmZKh9hVYjAAwBk-SxuZuRA4SHeiznnpDIxl2KgG_1KhAjQrUShfViIyvFLaZF1MdVWyNfIf6TJ4ef2iXJ3rwXB1sFSpcYBmc9NwrgVkeduJ7n1tpR-QFWoNGMo0Gq3VOzLrr9MdvX_WUCwH4EkACrGkYVLewbGeG5gd4Hci_lYzcT0aCt7tETK-MTqMIS-Sa0K47jTRCeSakGJEnvQ1u9sUBh5aQu45ImVhnsvFU0sxPI9c4rwDvlnzvfxTylNzuay5KNin2yc5quQ7PAMqt7PPoo78BFWtKgA priority: 102 providerName: Scholars Portal |
Title | A 'short walk' is longer before radiotherapy than afterwards: a qualitative study questioning the baseline and follow-up design |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20637086 https://search.proquest.com/docview/748950343 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-8-69 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC2915972 https://doaj.org/article/eb9e996987ec4d2d8315484807dd5b4b |
Volume | 8 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1La9tAEF6a5FIope-6Tc1SCj4tlbWSdpWbHRLSQkJJGzC9LPtMTI0cIpvQU_96Z1aKm42PvejgmRUrz6znm_HMJ0I-haqWQQfJrKwyVkAAZrXUlrnCGgfphssjkfbpWXVyUXydlbN_9Y4H_-CPZfV5XAjBRJmXTLKq3iF7ORKqYF4-_blJrdAt4xxRr9vTM26vfzDXvkjCUWTt3_5tvhec0sbJe5Ho-Bl52kNIOuls_pw88s0L8qSrv9FurOgl-TOho_YKsDW91YtfIzpv6WKJFTxqPOBUT2-0m_fTV78p1s9pfF04NtG2B1TTbtoy0oLTyEFL4y678i0s8BQDIIJUqhtHA_jT8patr6mLPSGvyMXx0Y_DE9a_bIEZiNArprkTpZWy1txoGwKX2llAQ8FmhgcjLAqqqrQ2cO6z0jhZ5NpBiLeZ52bMX5PdZtn4t4QKYwF05tbxTBY-uBr8gQPUgjsV2pR2QA4SG6jrjlhDIdV1KoFTp9CACg2opKrqARndGWyzLiYystrSnKI9k7vHD8C7VH8ulTe1r3GDwtvC5U5yzOFwzt650hRmQD6iNyikymiwF-dSr9tWffl-riY554AeAQLAnnqlsIRtW92PNsDXgexaieZ-ogln2SZieud0CkXYANf45bpVSBJUZrzgA_Km88HNc-WAMgVkpgMiEu9MHjyVNPOryCSe14BmRf7ufwzynjzuOioEG1f7ZHd1s_YfAKitzJDsiJmAqzwcD8ne9Ojs2_kwFj3gelrIYTzDw1hh-wsfdkMt |
link.rule.ids | 108,230,315,730,783,787,867,888,2109,2228,24330,24949,27936,27937,31732,33279,33757,53804,53806,76140,76141 |
linkProvider | BioMedCentral |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3Nb9MwFLfGOICEEJ-jMMBCSD1ZpLETO7t1iGmDbYexSRUXy59bRZVMTatpJ_51np20qumRa54d2e8j_j3rvV8Q-uzLSnjlBTGizAiDA5hUQhlimdEW0g2bRyLts_Py-Ip9nxSTHTRZ9cJ03X-QRHc9hfeNn029a5YL0D9kjps96bP4IV_Vj3XhL8ovI8Y54UVeEEHK6gF6CIk6CyF7cfhrnYoFN459R_3Yns5xe_4_ffCz5PiKLP_b3_KNwywttNw4uY6eoac95MTjbgvP0Y6rX6An3X0d7tqQXqI_YzxsbwCL4zs1-z3E0xbPmnDjh7UDXOvwXNlp3611j4PucPy9eCi6bQ-wwp0mI404jpy1OK6yu-6FCQ6HAzOAWgx6xx78r7kjy1tsYw3JK3R19O3y6zHpf85ANOhzQRS1vDBCVIpqZbynQlkD6MmbTFOvuQmCsiyM8ZS6rNBWsFxZgAQmc1SP6Gu0Wze1e4Mw1wZAam4szQRz3lbgPxSgGbyJKV2YATpIbCBvOyIOGaixUwl4hAwGlMGAUsiyGqDhymDreTHxEeXWyMNgz-Tt8UEzv5a9m0mnK1eFBXJnmM2toCHnC3351haa6QH6FLxBBmqNOtTuXKtl28qTnxdynFMKaBMgA6ypH-QbWLZRfSsEqCOwcSUj95OREPsmEeOV08kgCgVzNURLKwOpUJFRRgdor_PB9b5yQKUcMtkB4ol3JhtPJfX0JjKP5xWgX56__R-DfESPji_PTuXpyfmPd-hxV43ByajcR7uL-dK9B5C30B9ivP4FkMxT2A |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1bb9MwFLbGkBASQlxHYYCFkPpkLY1zcfbWAdXGZUKDSYMXy9etWpRUTatpT_x1znHSqqGPvFX1ceScS_wd65zPhLz3WSG88oIZkUUsgQ2YFUIZZhOjLaQbNg5E2t9Os-Pz5PNFerFDfq16YdruP0ii257C29qXU-_q5QL0D5njZk96GT7k8MNcH8ysb-NfZAejJM9ZnsYpEywr7pC7kKkneKvD2dHvdS6GfhwajzrZjs9xe_4_jfBlb_8KNP_bH_ON3axfabmxdU0ekYcd5qTj1kkekx1XPSEP2gM72vYhPSV_xnTYXAEYpzeqvB7SaUPLGo_8qHYAbB2dKzvt2rVuKSqPhvvFseq2OaSKtqoMPOI0kNbSsMr2vBcmOIo7JqJaCoqnHhywvmHLGbWhiOQZOZ98-vnhmHW3MzAN-lwwxW2eGiEKxbUy3nOhrAH45E2kude5wYEsS43xnLso1VYksbKACUzkuB7x52S3qiv3gtBcG0CpsbE8EonztgAH4oDN4EmJ0qkZkMOeDeSsZeKQyI3dHwGXkGhAiQaUQmbFgAxXBlvPC5mPyLYkj9CevaeHP-r5pewCWTpduAIXmDuT2NgKjkkfNuZbm-pED8g79AaJ3BoVFu9cqmXTyJMfZ3Iccw5wEzADrKkT8jU6sOp6IUAdSMfVk9zvSULwm94wXTmdxCGsmKsgXBqJrEJpxBM-IHutD67fKwZYmkMqOyB5zzt7L94fqaZXgXo8LgD-5vHL_zHIW3Lv-8eJ_Hpy-uUVud9WY-RslO2T3cV86V4DyFvoNyFc_wLznVOj |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A+%27short+walk%27+is+longer+before+radiotherapy+than+afterwards%3A+a+qualitative+study+questioning+the+baseline+and+follow-up+design&rft.jtitle=Health+and+quality+of+life+outcomes&rft.au=Taminiau-Bloem%2C+Elsbeth&rft.au=van+Zuuren%2C+Florence&rft.au=Koeneman%2C+Margot&rft.au=Rapkin%2C+Bruce&rft.date=2010-07-16&rft.pub=BioMed+Central+Ltd&rft.issn=1477-7525&rft.eissn=1477-7525&rft.volume=8&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=69&rft.epage=69&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186%2F1477-7525-8-69&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=oai_biomedcentral_com_1477_7525_8_69 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1477-7525&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1477-7525&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1477-7525&client=summon |