↓ Skip to main content

Psychometric properties of the FACT-M questionnaire in patients with Merkel cell carcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Psychometric properties of the FACT-M questionnaire in patients with Merkel cell carcinoma
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0815-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Murtuza Bharmal, Fatoumata Fofana, Carla Dias Barbosa, Paul Williams, Lisa Mahnke, Alexia Marrel, Michael Schlichting

Abstract

No validated disease-specific questionnaires exist to capture health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Melanoma (FACT-M) is validated in patients with melanoma, which shares many similarities with MCC. This paper reports the psychometric properties of the FACT-M in the metastatic MCC population. Data were collected as part of a single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial involving patients with metastatic MCC who had failed at least one previous line of chemotherapy. FACT-M and EQ-5D were administered at baseline, Week 7, Week 13, and Week 25. An optional interview was administered at the same time points. MCC-specific FACT-M scores were derived following a combined quantitative and qualitative approach. Reliability and construct validity of original and additional MCC-specific FACT-M scores were assessed at baseline. Capacity to detect change in tumor size was assessed from baseline to Week 7. Minimally important differences (MIDs) were computed using distribution and anchor-based methods. Baseline assessments were available in 70 patients (mean age: 70 years; 74.3% male); 19 patients were interviewed at baseline. Additional MCC-specific scores were as follows: Physical Function score (six items), Psychological Impact score (six items), and MCC summary score (12 items). FACT-M original and additional MCC-specific scores both demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties: high reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.81-0.96), good convergent validity (correlations above 0.4 observed for 88% of items of the Melanoma surgery scale, 75% of items of the Melanoma scale, and 100% of items of the other FACT-M domains). Some evidence of floor/ceiling effects and poor discriminant ability was found. Higher scores (better HRQoL) on all FACT-M domains were observed in patients with better functioning (assessed by ECOG performance score), supporting clinical validity. Despite the small sample for responsiveness analysis (n = 37), the majority of FACT-M scores showed sensitivity to changes in tumor size at Week 7 with small to moderate effect sizes. MIDs were consistent with previously reported values in the literature for FACT-M domains. FACT-M is suitable to capture HRQoL in patients with metastatic MCC, thus making it a potential candidate for assessing HRQoL in MCC trials. This study is a post-hoc analysis conducted on data collected in Part A of the JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial. This trial was registered on 2 June 2014 with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02155647 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 5 15%
Other 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Researcher 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 9 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 18%
Psychology 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 10 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 August 2019.
All research outputs
#6,844,364
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#793
of 2,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,008
of 440,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#30
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,513 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.