Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1999 Mar;17(3):998-1007.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.3.998.

Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires

G Velikova et al. J Clin Oncol. 1999 Mar.

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate alternative automated methods of collecting data on quality of life (QOL) in cancer patients. After initial evaluation of a range of technologies, we compared computer touch-screen questionnaires with paper questionnaires scanned by optical reading systems in terms of patients' acceptance, data quality, and reliability.

Patients and methods: In a randomized cross-over trial, 149 cancer patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30, version 2.0 (EORTC QLQ-C30), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) on paper and on a touch screen. In a further test-retest study, 81 patients completed the electronic version of the questionnaires twice, with a time interval of 3 hours between questionnaires.

Results: Fifty-two percent of the patients preferred the touch screen to paper; 24% had no preference. The quality of the data collected with the touch-screen system was good, with no missed responses. At the group level, the differences between scores obtained with the two modes of administration of the instruments were small, suggesting equivalence for most of the QOL scales, with the possible exception of the emotional, fatigue, and nausea/vomiting scales and the appetite item, where patients tended to give more positive responses on the touch screen. At the individual patient level, the agreement was good, with a kappa coefficient from 0.57 to 0.77 and percent global agreement from 61% to 97%. The electronic questionnaire had good test-retest reliability, with correlation coefficients between the two administrations from 0.78 to 0.95, kappa coefficients of agreement from 0.55 to 0.90, and percent global agreement from 56% to 100%.

Conclusion: Computer touch-screen QOL questionnaires were well accepted by cancer patients, with good data quality and reliability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources