Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: issues, evidence and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: This review aims to assist cancer clinical researchers in choosing between the two most widely used measures of cancer-specific health-related quality of life: the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Information on QLQ-C30 and FACT-G content, scale structure, accessibility and availability was collated from websites and manuals. A systematic review was undertaken to identify all articles reporting on psychometric properties and information to assist interpretability. Evidence for reliability, validity and responsiveness was rated using a standardised checklist. Instrument properties were compared and contrasted to inform recommendations. RESULTS: Psychometric evidence does not recommend one questionnaire over the other in general. However, there are important differences between the scale structure, social domains and tone that inform choice for any particular study. CONCLUSIONS: Where research objectives are concerned with the impact of a specific tumour type, treatment or symptom, choice should be guided by the availability, content, scale structure and psychometric properties of relevant European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer versus Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy modules. Because the FACT-G combines symptoms and concerns within each scale, individual items should always be reviewed within the context of specific research objectives. Where these issues are indecisive, researchers are encouraged to use an algorithm at the end of the current article.

Reducing coronary heart disease in the Australian Coalfields: evaluation of a 10-year community intervention.

Coronary heart disease is a leading cause of death in Australia with the Coalfields district of New South Wales having one of the country's highest rates. Identification of the Coalfields epidemic in the 1970's led to the formation of a community awareness program in the late 1980's (the healthy heart support group) followed by a more intense community action program in 1990, the Coalfields Healthy Heartbeat (CHHB). CHHB is a coalition of community members, local government officers, health workers and University researchers. We evaluate the CHHB program, examining both the nature and sustainability of heart health activities undertaken, as well as trends in risk factor levels and rates of coronary events in the Coalfields in comparison with nearby local government areas. Process data reveal difficulties mobilising the community as a whole; activities had to be selected for interested subgroups such as families of heart disease patients, school children, retired people and women concerned with family nutrition and body maintenance. Outcome data show a significantly larger reduction in case fatality for Coalfields men (although nonfatal heart attacks did not decline) while changes in risk factors levels were comparable with surrounding areas. We explain positive responses to the CHHB by schools, heart attack survivors and women interested in body maintenance in terms of the meaning these subgroups find in health promotion discourses based on their embodied experiences. When faced with a threat to one's identity, health discourse suddenly becomes meaningful along with the regimens for health improvement. General public disinterest in heart health promotion is examined in the context of historical patterns of outsiders criticising the lifestyle of miners, an orientation toward communal rather than individual responsibility for health (i.e. community 'owned' emergency services and hospitals) and anger about risks from environmental hazards imposed by industrialists.

Community worry about heart disease: a needs survey in the Coalfields and Newcastle areas of the Hunter region.

A needs survey was administered by mail in the Coalfields area of the Hunter region (a lower socioeconomic area around Cessnock) and in a higher socioeconomic area of Newcastle. The purpose was to assist planning for Coalfields Healthy Heartbeat--a community-action heart disease prevention program. Response rates from random samples of residents were 435/897 (49 per cent) for the Coalfields and 565/875 (65 per cent) for Newcastle. In both study areas heart attack was ranked eleventh from a list of 17 potential community worries, well below drugs, crime, road safety, the environment, cancer and 'loss of health'. Coalfields respondents were more worried about all issues on the list than were the residents in Newcastle and were less likely to have heard about recent health promotion campaigns. Coalfields respondents felt that heart disease prevention was the responsibility of the individual, the family, and the medical profession, in that order, and much less the responsibility of local community groups. Results suggest that health promotion strategies incorporating values, language and symbols that are meaningful to distinct subgroups may be more successful than disease-specific programs aimed at the general population.