Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: To report the reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian (FACT-O) in a consecutive series of outpatients with epithelial ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred thirty-two ovarian cancer patients attending an outpatient gynecologic oncology clinic completed questionnaires at baseline. The patients' FACT-O scores were compared with their performance status, disease stage, treatment status, and other factors hypothesized to be related to quality of life. Patients received a second questionnaire either one week after baseline to assess the instrument's test-retest reliability and/or two months after baseline to evaluate its sensitivity to change in performance status. RESULTS: Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the FACT-O were adequate. Overall, the scales correlated with other measures as expected; all correlations were in the hypothesized direction. Patients with advanced disease, poor performance status, and who were receiving active treatment had lower scores on physical, functional, and ovarian cancer-specific scales. The total FACT-O and emotional well-being scores were lower for patients with poor performance status and patients in active treatment. The FACT-O total and all subscale scores except emotional well-being were sensitive to decreases in performance status. CONCLUSION: Overall, the FACT-O provides a reliable and valid assessment of the quality of life of women with ovarian cancer, and is appropriate as a brief quality of life assessment in clinical trials and descriptive studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Basen‐Engquist et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: