a brief assessment of physical functioning for prostate cancer patients

Clicks: 140
ID: 132270
2010
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Star

Ranked #14 of 15 articles by views in proceedings of 2019 international conference on innovative trends in computer engineering, itce 2019

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Jin-Shei Lai1, Rita Bode2, Hwee-Lin Wee3, David Eton4, David Cella11Department of Medical Social Sciences, 2Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, IL USA; 3Department of Pharmacy, National University of Singapore, Singapore; 4Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USAAbstract: We aimed to validate a more rapid, yet reliable means of assessing physical function (PF) for patients with prostate cancer. The sample included 128 prostate cancer patients recruited from urology and general oncology clinics at two Chicago-area hospitals. The main outcome measures were: A 36-item PF item bank that included a 5-item short form (BriefPF) and the 10-item PF subscale (PF-10) from the Medical Outcomes Study SF-36. Validity, information function, and relative precision (calculated using Rasch analysis and raw scores) of the BriefPF were compared to the PF-10 and the full PF item bank. We found that the BriefPF and PF-10 were strongly correlated (r = 0.85) with the PF bank, and all three scales differentiated patients according to performance status (FPF bank(2,124) = 32.51 P < 0.001, FPF-10(2,121) = 27.35 P < 0.001, FBriefPF (2,123) = 38.40 P < 0.001). BriefPF has excellent precision relative to the PF-10 in measuring patients with different performance status levels. The Rasch-based information function indicated that the BriefPF was more informative than PF-10 in measuring moderate to higher functioning patients. Hence, the BriefPF offers a parsimonious and precise measure of PF for use among men with prostate cancer, and may aid in the timely inclusion of patient-reported outcomes in treatment decision-making.Keywords: quality-of-life, item bank, short-form, Medical Outcomes Study
Reference Key
lai2010patienta Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Jin-Shei Lai;Rita Bode;Hwee-Lin Wee;et al
Journal proceedings of 2019 international conference on innovative trends in computer engineering, itce 2019
Year 2010
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.