Skip to content

Advertisement

You're viewing the new version of our site. Please leave us feedback.

Learn more

BMC Research Notes

Open Access

The european organization for research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire-BR 23 breast cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire: psychometric properties in a Moroccan sample of breast cancer patients

  • Samira El Fakir1Email author,
  • Naima Abda1,
  • Karima Bendahhou1,
  • Ahmed Zidouh2,
  • Maria Bennani2,
  • Hassan Errihani3,
  • Abdelatif Benider4,
  • Rachid Bekkali2 and
  • Chakib Nejjari1
BMC Research Notes20147:53

https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-53

Received: 5 June 2013

Accepted: 7 January 2014

Published: 21 January 2014

Abstract

Background

Quality of life (QOL) and its measurement in cancer patients is becoming increasingly important. Breast cancer diagnosis and treatment are often associated with psychological distress and reduced QoL. In Arabic-speaking countries, QoL of patients with cancer is inadequately studied.

The aim of this study was to test the reliability and validity of the Moroccan Arabic version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Breast Cancer-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-BR23).

Methods

After translation and cross-cultural adaptation, the questionnaire was tested on breast cancer patients. The participants’ number for the test and the retest were 105 and 37 respectively. Internal consistency was tested using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (α), the test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Construct validity was assessed by examining item-convergent and divergent validity.

Results

The questionnaire was administered to 105 patients. The mean age of patients was 48 years (SD: 16), 62.9% were married. 68.6% of all participants lived in urban area.

The average time to complete the QLQ- BR23 was 15 min. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, were all >0.7, with the exception of breast symptoms and arm symptoms. All items exceeded the 0.4 criterion for convergent validity except item 20 and 23 related to pain and skin problems in the affected breast respectively.

Conclusion

In general, the findings of this study indicated that the Moroccan Arabic version of the EORTC QLQ-BR23 is a reliable and valid supplementary measure of the QOL in breast cancer patients and can be used in clinical trials and studies of outcome research in oncology.

Keywords

Breast cancerQuality of lifeReliabilityValidity

Background

Worldwide, breast cancer is the most common malignancy diagnosed in women, the second most common type of cancer after lung cancer (10.4% of all cancer incidence, both sexes counted) and the fifth most common cause of cancer death. In 2008, breast cancer caused 458 000 deaths worldwide [1, 2]. Breast cancer is the most frequent type of cancer among women in Morocco (33.4%) [3].

Today, Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is now considered an important endpoint in cancer clinical trials. Although there has been considerable researches on the quality of life (QOL) of women with breast cancer [4], the results may not be significantly affecting clinical decision – making because the clinical significance of findings is not specified [5, 6]. More studies are therefore needed to make QOL assessment feasible, understandable and scientifically viable in oncology researches and practices [6]. In particular, HRQOL assessments in oncology facilitate doctor –patient communication, they point to areas where patients may experience serious problems, they can be used as diagnostic tools for problem- oriented follow – up care, and the data are strong predictors of survival [7, 8].

The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) has developed several questionnaires to assess QoL. In assessing quality of life in cancer patients, it is recommended to use a cancer-specific questionnaire as a general measure of quality of life (e.g. the EORTC QLQ-C30) [9] plus site-specific modules (e.g. breast cancer specific or gastric cancer specific). Thus, for instance the EORTC, in addition to core cancer quality of life questionnaire, has developed several site-specific questionnaires including one for breast cancer (QLQ-BR23) [10] in order to collect more relevant patient-reported outcomes in studying quality of life in this group of cancer patients. The English-language versions of these questionnaires were successfully tested [10], it has been found to be reliable and valid in diverse cultures, including, the United Arab Emirates [11], Iran [12], China [13], Greece [14], Kuwait [15] and South Asia [16]. The EORTC QLQ-BR23 questionnaire was previously translated into Arabic but was not efficiently validated for use in patients speaking Moroccan dialect. Indeed, the dialect spoken in Morocco is very different from the classical Arabic language which is understood by part of the Moroccan population mainly educated people.

The objective of this study was to translate and adapt the original version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Breast Cancer-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-BR23) from the English to the Moroccan Arabic language, to refine its terminology and to adapt it to the Moroccan culture.

Patients and methods

Characteristics of the EORTC QLQ-BR-23original version

The 23 item breast cancer -specific module, the EORTC QLQ-BR-23 [17], consists of two multi-item functional scales (body image and sexual functioning), three symptom scales (systemic side effects, breast symptoms, and arm symptoms), and three single item scales on sexual enjoyment, future perspectives, and upset by hair loss. The responses indicate the extent to which patient has experienced symptoms or problems. Each item was scored on a four point Likert scale (“not at all” [1], to “very much” [4]), and the time frame was “during the past week”, except for the sexual items (“during the past four weeks”).

Translation and cultural adaptation of the EORTC QLQ-BR 23

The EORTC QLQ-BR 23 was translated into local Moroccan Arabic. We followed the published guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measurement [18, 19]. The questions in the original version of the EORTC QLQ-BR 23 were initially translated into Moroccan Arabic by two bilingual people. Then it was reviewed by a committee of professionals composed by oncologists and epidemiologists, in order to obtain the first Arabic version. The resulting version of this intermediate Moroccan Arabic version was applied to volunteers persons with cancer that agreed to participate and to present their opinion if the translated version was comprehensible; two researchers had to register the comments, doubts and suggestions. The second Arabic version was written after this initial assessment. Subsequent back-translation into English was performed by two other translators with a good knowledge of English but who were not familiar with the EORTC QLQ – BR 23. A comparison with the original version was performed by a committee of professionals and translators to check whether they contained literal differences. The translation was then reviewed and adjusted by the committee. In the process of translating the questionnaire from English into Arabic, several items were substituted to adapt the terminology to the local culture : item 39 “Have you felt physically less attractive as a result of your disease or treatment? “ and item 40” Have you been feeling less feminine as a result of your disease or treatment?”. A final version of the EORTC QLQ – BR23 in Moroccan was elaborated. As most of the patients in our sample were illiterate, the questionnaire was administered by two interviewers. Their task was to read out the questions and mark the chosen answers for this category of patients without providing any input.

The subjects recruitment

Between August and November 2009, subjects were recruited from the two main oncology centers in the country (National institute of oncology in Rabat and oncology center of Ibn Rochd hospital in Casablanca). Subjects attending these two centers are from around the country (north, center and south). Subjects were eligible if they were at least 18 years old, had a confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer and spoke Moroccan Arabic. Ethical approval was obtained from the ethics committees in the University Hospital Center Hassan II in Fez- Morocco and all the subjects were informed of the conditions related to the study and gave their written, informed consent.

Instruments and procedures

Two questionnaires of the Arabic version of the EORTC QLQ-BR23 were administered to patients by two different interviewers. The order of interviewers was randomly defined.

The participants’ number for the retest were 37. A third questionnaire was administered three to ten days later to assess reproducibility. Participants provided socio-demographic and clinical data and a measure of pain on a visual analogical scale.

Scoring

The scoring algorithm recommended by the EORTC [20] was used to analyze participants’ responses to the QLQ-BR23 questionnaires. In summary, the algorithm creates an average from component item responses and then transforms this to a value on a 0–100 scale. For the functional scales, a higher score corresponds to better function. For symptom scales, a higher score corresponds to more frequent and/or more intense symptoms.

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were generated to evaluate missing data, score distributions (i.e. mean, range, floor and ceiling effects). The reliability and validity of the EORTC QLQ-BR23 were examined in the study.

Reliability

The internal consistency of the Moroccan Arabic version of the EORTC QLQ – BR23 questionnaire was assessed for the multi-item questionnaire scales using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. A value of 0.70 or greater was considered as adequate [21]. Test-retest reliability and inter-observer reliability were estimated by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for each of the score components of the EORTC QLQ – BR23.

Validity

We used multitrait scaling analysis to examine the extent to which the items of the questionnaire could be combined into the hypothesized multi-item scales. This analysis was based on an examination of item-scale correlations for item-convergence and item-discriminance [22]. Evidence of item-convergence was defined as a correlation of 0.40 or greater between an item and its own scale. item-discriminance was satisfied if each item has a substantially higher correlation with its hypothesized scale than with scales measuring other concepts.

Acceptability

The acceptability of the EORTC QLQ – BR23 was assessed with the response rate, percentage of missing Data and time required to complete the questionnaire. A P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Data analysis was performed using SPSS 17.

Results

In total, the questionnaire was administered to 105 patients, 44 were recruited in Rabat and 61 in Casablanca. The mean age was 48 (standard deviation 16) years. The majority were married (62.9%); illiterate (60%) and lived in urban areas (68.6%). The Socio-demographic characteristics of the study sample appear in Table 1.
Table 1

Sociodemographic characteristics of 105 patients who completed EORTC QLQ-BR23 questionnaire

 

N

%

Centre

Rabat

44

41.9

Casablanca

61

58.1

Marital status

Single

14

13.3

Married

66

62.9

Widowed

10

9.5

Divorced

15

14.3

Occupation

Employed

6

5.7

Unemployed

3

2.9

House wife

95

90.5

Retired

1

1

Educational level

Illiterate

63

60.0

Primary

22

21.0

Secondary

16

15.2

University

2

1.9

Residence area

Urban

72

68.6

Rural

30

28.6

Âge mean (SD)

48.1

(10.5)

Third assessment (test- retest)

37

35.2

SD: Standard deviation.

The average time to complete the EORTC QLQ-BR23 was 15 min. Missing data rate for items varied from 0.0% to 49.5%. 83% of items didn’t have missing responses.

Data on central tendency and variability of EORTC QLQ-BR23 scale are presented in Table 2. The scores for different scales ranged from 34.0 to 77.8. “Systemic therapy side effects” scale had the lower score (median 57.14). High floor effect was observed for the “Future perspective “scale and the higher ceiling effect was observed for the “Body image” (Table 2).
Table 2

Central tendency, variability of the EORTC QLQ-BR23 scale

 

N

Median

Mean

Standard deviation

Floor effecta(%)

Ceiling effectb(%)

Body image

105

83.33

77.54

25.82

0.0

39.0

Sexual functioning

66

66.66

61.11

29.83

3.8

13.3

Sexual enjoyment

53

66.67

58.49

29.17

5.7

8.6

Future perspective

105

66.67

46.98

41.27

39.0

24.8

Systemic therapy side effects

105

57.14

59.86

22.98

1.0

2.9

Breast symptoms

105

83.33

77.86

19.94

0.0

25.7

Arm symptoms

105

77.78

0.00

26.64

1.9

22.9

Upset by hair loss

50

68.94

34.00

41.23

25.7

9.5

aPercentage of the lowest modality.

bPercentage of the highest modality.

Data on reliability of EORTC QLQ-BR23 scale are presented in Table 3. Throughout the instrument, only one scale (breast symptoms) did not meet the 0.70 internal consistency criterion, and another (arm symptoms) was borderline (α = 0.68).
Table 3

Internal consistency and reliability of the EORTC QLQ-BR23

 

Cronbach’s α

Reliability CCI

Inter-observer

Test-retest

Body image

0,76

0,76

0,85

Sexual functioning

0,76

0,5

0,79

Sexual enjoyment

-

0,24

0,68

Future perspective

-

0,72

0,72

Systemic therapy side effects

0,7

0,87

0,68

Breast symptoms

0,5

0,80

0,79

Arm symptoms

0,63

0,85

0,75

Upset by hair loss

-

0,80

0,79

The ICC between two interviewers, ranged from 0.24 for “Sexual enjoyment” to 0.87 for “Systemic therapy side effects “.

We collected test/retest data from 37 patients among whom the questionnaire was administered twice (during the baseline visit and on average 5 days later). Test-retest reliability was assessed using the ICC, which ranged from 0.68 for “Sexual enjoyment” and “Systemic therapy side effects “to 0.85 for “Body image”.

Results for multitrait scaling analysis are shown in Table 4. The breast symptom scale exhibited moderate item-convergence with only two out of 4 items (50.0%) exceeding the criterion of 0.40 for the correlation coefficient (r : 0.04-0.8). The body image and Arm symptoms scales exhibited 100% item-convergence (r: 0.77-0.83 and 0.57-0.84, respectively) and 100% item-discriminance (r : 0.06-0.53 and 0.02-0.52, respectively).
Table 4

Multitrait scaling analyse of the EORTC QLQ-BR23

Scales

Convergence (r, % success)*

Discriminance (r, % success)**

Body image

0,77-0,83, 100

0.06-0.53, 100

Sexual functioning

0,89-0,91, 100

0.09-0.35, 100

Systemic therapy side effects

0,48-0,66, 100

0.01-0.37, 96.42

Breast symptoms

0,04-0.8, 50

0.00-0.89, 0.75

Arm symptoms

0,57-0,84, 100

0.02-0.52, 100

*Number of item-scale correlations greater than 0.40 /total number of item-scale correlations.

**Number of correlations of items with own scales significantly higher than correlations with other scale/total number of correlations.

Discussion

The EORTC QLQ-BR23 instruments have been translated into local Moroccan Arabic according to procedures documented elsewhere [18, 19]. The present study aimed to assess the reliability and validity of this translation for use in Morocco. This evaluation of the measurement properties of the Moroccan Arabic version of the EORTC QLQ-BR23 shows that it is a reliable and valid measure of QoL in Moroccan patients with breast cancer.

In the translation stage, we followed the international guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures [18, 19]. We then supplemented a pilot test in Moroccan patients who were asked to identify words and sentence structures that were problematic for the target population. Next, a conceptual adaptation in the final version was performed: Certain expressions in the original version of the EORTC QLQ-BR23 needed modification in the Moroccan version of the EORTC QLQ-BR23. They mainly concerned the item 39 “Have you felt physically less attractive as a result of your disease or treatment? “ and item 40” Have you been feeling less feminine as a result of your disease or treatment?”. The Arabic dialect translation of the phrases “ less attractive “ and “ less feminine” doesn’t exist, so we have changed the first one into “your look isn’t appreciated anymore”, while we translated the second one into classical Arabic.

The necessary number of subjects used was calculated based on the reliability curve of Streiner [23] and was considered sufficient to evaluate psychometric properties. The mean time required for conducting the interviews was 15 min, the same time reported in studies from other countries [2426]. Time between test and retest was five days on average. Streiner and Norman indicated that expert opinions regarding the appropriate interval varies from one hour to one year, depending on the task, but generally, a retest interval of 2 to 14 days is usually used [23].

The internal consistency coefficients of most scales in the EORTC QLQ-BR23 were also satisfactory. This was confirmed by the Cronbach’s alpha values that exceeded 0.70 for all scales except the arm symptoms and breast symptoms scales. The highest value of Cronbach’s alpha for the EORTC QLQ-BR23 was found for sexual functioning (alpha: 0.76), a finding previously reported among Iranian and Western women [27]. This suggests that sex-related determinants of QoL are perceived similarly by patients with different cultural backgrounds.

The test/retest correlations of the EORTC QLQ-BR23 were also high in most scale/single items. Because of the small sample size, the results of test/retest of this study, though mostly satisfactory, might be subject to errors and should be read with caution.

Construct validity was assessed by testing convergent and discriminant validity of items. The body imageand sexual functioning scales exhibited strong psychometric properties with satisfactory results for multitrait scaling. The Breast symptoms scale evidenced moderate item-convergence, which is consistent with previous studies on Greek patients with breast cancer [14]. This result for multitrait scaling confirmed the hypothesized scale structure, implying that the translation of the items and the response choices are appropriate and that scale scores derived from the Moroccan Arabic version could contribute to cross-cultural comparisons.

Because of the high frequency of illiteracy among participants, an interviewer had administered the questionnaire for most patients. Unlike northern countries, the questionnaire could not be used as an auto-administered questionnaire except for a minority of Moroccan population. Another limitation related to illiteracy among participants in fact the answers to the questions could be affected especially those related with their sexual life which’s a kind of taboo for them.

A limitation of the study is that responsiveness over time was not performed. We would recommend that additional studies be carried out with patients under active treatment in order to document the responsiveness.

Despite the fact that Arabic language is commonly spoken across the country, there are some other regional languages such as “Tarifit”, “Tamazight” and “Tachelhit” that are more popular in some Moroccan regions. But, the majority of these people speak also Arabic. Further validation should be specifically performed in these regions because inclusion in these patient groups in local or national clinical studies is essential.

Conclusion

Based on the findings of this study, the Moroccan Arabic version of the QLQ-BR23 questionnaire has acceptable reliability and validity, which are comparable to those reported in other languages. In addition, the questionnaire could be used in clinical trials that evaluate the impact of specific interventions on the QoL of Moroccan patients with breast cancer.

Abbreviations

EORTC QLQ-Br23: 

The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires-Breast 23

EQ-5D: 

Euroquol 5 dimension

ICC: 

Intraclass correlation coefficient

SF-36: 

36-Item short form health survey

VAS: 

Visual analogical scale

SD: 

Standard deviation.

Declarations

Acknowledgment

We thank “Fondation Lalla Salma Prevention and Treatment of Cancers” and “Roche Laboratories” for their support. We thank Dr Maryam Fourtassi for rereading this manuscript.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of epidemiology and public health, Faculty of Medicine, University Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah
(2)
Fondation Lalla Salma Prevention and Treatment of Cancers
(3)
National Institute of Oncology
(4)
Oncology Center Ibn Rochd

References

  1. World Health Organization: Cancer. 2006,http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs297/,Google Scholar
  2. World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer World Cancer Report. 2003, Available at: http://www.iarc.fr/en/Publications/PDFs-online
  3. Globocan 2008(IARC) International Agency for Research on Cancer; section of cancer information. 2008,http://globocan.iarc.fr, (IARC) International Agency for Research on Cancer; section of cancer information,
  4. Montazeri A: Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: a bibliographic review of the literature from 1974to 2007. J Expt Clin Cancer Res. 2008, 27: 32-10.1186/1756-9966-27-32.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. King MT, Fayers PM: Making quality-of-life results more meaningful for clinicians. Lancet. 2008, 371 (9614): 709-710. 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60324-4.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Sloan JA, Frost MH, Berzon R, Dueck A, Guyatt G, Moinpour C, Sprangers M, Ferrans C, Cella D: Clinical significance consensus meeting group the clinical significance of quality of life assessments in oncology: a summary for clinicians. Support Care Cancer. 2006, 14: 988-998. 10.1007/s00520-006-0085-y.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Albert US, Koller M, Lorenz W, Kopp I, Heitmann C, Stinner B, Rothmund M, Schulz KD: Quality circle: quality of life profile: frommeasurement to clinical application. Breast. 2002, 11: 324-334. 10.1054/brst.2002.0419.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Sprangers MA: Quality-of-life assessment in oncology.Achievements and challenges. Acta Oncol. 2002, 41: 229-237. 10.1080/02841860260088764.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality of life instrument for use in international clinical trials inoncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993, 85: 365-376. 10.1093/jnci/85.5.365.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Sprangers MA, Groendvold M, Arraras JI, et al: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer cancer specific quality-of-life questionnairemodule: first results from a three country field study. J Clin Oncol. 1996, 14: 2756-2768.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Manal A, Awad A, Srdjan Denic B, Hakam Taji E: Validation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires forArabic-speaking Populations. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 2008, 1138: 146-154. 10.1196/annals.1414.021.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Montazeri A, Harirchi I, Vahdani M, et al: The EORTC breast cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-BR23): translation and validation study of the Iranian version. Qual. LifeRes. 2000, 9: 177-184.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Chie WC, Chang KJ, Huang CS, et al: Quality of life of breast cancer patients in Taiwan: validation of the Taiwan Chinese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC-BR23. Psychooncology. 2003, 12: 729-735. 10.1002/pon.727.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Kontodimopoulos N, Ntinoulis K, Niakas D: Validity of the Greek EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 for measuring health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients. Eur J Cancer Care (Eng) . 2011 May, 20 (3): 354-361. 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2009.01170.x.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Shafika A: Alawadi1 and Jude U Ohaeri*2. Health – related quality of life of Kuwaiti women with breast cancer: a comparative study using the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire. BMC Cancer. 2009, 9: 222-10.1186/1471-2407-9-222.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Jayasekara H, Rajapaksa LC, Brandberg Y: Measuring breast cancer-specific health-related quality of life in South Asia: psychometric properties of the Sinhala version of the EORTC QLQ-BR23. Qual Life Res. 2008, 17 (6): 927-932. 10.1007/s11136-008-9359-9.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Sprangers MA, Groenvold M, Arraras JI, Franklin J, te Velde A, Muller M, Franzini L: Williams A, deHaes HC, Hopwood P, Cull A, Aaronson NK: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a three-country fieldstudy. J Clin Oncol. 1996, 14: 2756-2768.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D: Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. JClin Epidemiol. 1993, 46 (12): 1417-1432. 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-N.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Beaton D, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB: Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. SPINE. 2000, 25 (24): 3186-3191. 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, Bjordal K, Groenvold M, Curran D: Bottomley A, on behalf of the EORTC Quality of Life Group: The EORTC QLQ – C30 Scoring Manual 3rd edition. 2001, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer: BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  21. Cronbach LJ: Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. psychometrika. 1951, 16: 297-334. 10.1007/BF02310555.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Hays RD, Hayashi T, Carson S, Ware JE: User’s Guide for the Multitrait Analysis Program (MAP). 1988, Santa Monica, CA: Rand CorporationGoogle Scholar
  23. Streiner DL, Norman GR: Health measurment scales. Apractical guide to their development and use. Third edition ed. 2003, Oxford: Oxford university pressGoogle Scholar
  24. Montazeri A, Harirchi I, Vahdani M, et al: The EORTC breast cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-BR23): translation and validation study of the Iranian version. Qual. Life Res. 2000, 9: 177-184. 10.1023/A:1008918310251.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Kyriaki M, Eleni T, Efi P, et al: The EORTC Core Quality of Life questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) in terminally ill cancer patients under palliative care: validity and reliability in a Hellenic sample. Int. J Cancer. 2001, 94: 135-139. 10.1002/ijc.1439.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Awad MA, Denic S, El Taji H: Validation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires for Arabic-speaking Populations. Ann. N.Y Acad. Sci. 2008, 1138: 146-154. 10.1196/annals.1414.021.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Montazeri A, Harirchi I, Vahdani M, et al: The EORTC breast cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-BR23): translation and validation study of the Iranian version. Qual. Life Res. 2000, 9: 177-184. 10.1023/A:1008918310251.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© El Fakir et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement