SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Villeneuve PJ, Raman S, Leclerc JM, Huchcroft S, Dryer D, Morrison H. Survival rates among Canadian children and teenagers with cancer diagnosed between 1985 and 1988. Cancer Prev Control. 1998; 2: 15-22.
  • 2
    Ross JA, Severson RK, Pollock BH, Robison LL. Childhood cancer in the United States. A geographical analysis of cases from the Pediatric Cooperative Clinical Trials groups. Cancer. 1996; 77: 201-207.
  • 3
    Barr RD, Furlong W, Dawson S, et al. An assessment of global health status in survivors of acute lymphoblastic leukemia in childhood. Am J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 1993; 15: 284-290.
  • 4
    Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, Barr RD, Zhang Y, Wang Q. Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system. Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Med Care. 1996; 34: 702-722.
  • 5
    Seid M, Varni JW, Rode CA, Katz ER. The pediatric cancer quality of life inventory: A modular approach to measuring health-related quality of life in children with cancer. Int J Cancer Suppl. 1999; 12: 71-76.
  • 6
    Varni JW, Katz ER, Seid M, Quiggins DJ, Friedman-Bender A, Castro CM. The Pediatric Cancer Quality of Life Inventory (PCQL). I. Instrument development, descriptive statistics, and cross-informant variance. J Behav Med. 1998; 21: 179-204.
  • 7
    Tebbi CK, London WB, Friedman D, et al. Dexrazoxane-associated risk for acute myeloid leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome and other secondary malignancies in pediatric Hodgkin's disease. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 493-500.
  • 8
    Varni JW, Burwinkle TM, Seid M, Skarr D. The PedsQL 4.0 as a pediatric population health measure: feasibility, reliability, and validity. Ambul Pediatr. 2003; 3: 329-341.
  • 9
    The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL): position paper from the World Health Organization. Soc Sci Med. 1995; 41: 1403-149.
  • 10
    Varni JW, Burwinkle TM, Katz ER, Meeske K, Dickinson P. The PedsQL in pediatric cancer: reliability and validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Generic Core Scales, Multidimensional Fatigue Scale, and Cancer Module. Cancer. 2002; 94: 2090-2106.
  • 11
    Boyle MH, Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance GW, Hatcher J. Reliability of the Health Utilities Index-Mark III used in the 1991 cycle 6 Canadian General Social Survey Health Questionnaire. Qual Life Res. 1995; 4: 249-257.
  • 12
    Trudel JG, Rivard M, Dobkin PL, Leclerc JM, Robaey P. Psychometric properties of the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 system in paediatric oncology patients. Qual Life Res. 1998; 7: 421-432.
  • 13
    Krabbe PF, Essink-Bot ML, Bonsel GJ. The comparability and reliability of 5 health-state valuation methods. Soc Sci Med. 1997; 45: 1641-1652.
  • 14
    Lansky SB, List MA, Lansky LL, Ritter-Sterr C, Miller DR. The measurement of performance in childhood cancer patients. Cancer. 1987; 60: 1651-166.
  • 15
    Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Jaeschke R. How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In: SpilkerB. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Raven; 1996: 49-56.
  • 16
    Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL. Reproductibility and responsiveness of health status measures: statistics and strategies for evaluation. Controlled Clin Trials. 1991; 12( suppl 4): 142S-58S.
  • 17
    Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd ed. ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 1988.
  • 18
    Banks BA, Barrowman NJ, Klaassen R. Health-related quality of life: changes in children undergoing chemotherapy. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2008; 30: 292-297.
  • 19
    Langfitt JT, Vickrey BG, McDermott MP, et al. Validity and responsiveness of generic preference-based HRQOL instruments in chronic epilepsy. Qual Life Res. 2006; 15: 899-914.
  • 20
    Hatoum HT, Brazier JE, Akhras KS. Comparison of the HUI3 with the SF-36 preference based SF-6D in a clinical trial setting. Value Health. 2004; 7: 602-609.
  • 21
    Feeny D, Wu L, Eng K. Comparing short form 6D, standard gamble, and Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and Mark 3 utility scores: results from total hip arthroplasty patients. Qual Life Res. 2004; 13: 1659-1670.