Skip to main content
Search
Search
Advanced Search
Skip main navigation
Open access
Research Article
24 July 2026

Validity of HINT-8 in evaluating health-related quality of life among cervical cancer patients

Authors: Ah-Yeon Lee https://orcid.org/0009-0003-6220-5247, Soo Hyeon Lee https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1863-8371, Min-Ju Kim https://orcid.org/0009-0009-5126-4317, Ji-Eun An https://orcid.org/0009-0009-3734-6594, Gyeong-U Hong https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7003-1458, Woo-Jeong Sim https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0975-2669, Hyunji Lim https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4365-2079, … Show All … , Tae-Wook Kong https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9007-565X, Byung Su Kwon https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9586-0200, Sung Taek Park https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7841-4532, Kyeong A So https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3566-8436, Won Moo Lee https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3433-9478, Jung-Yun Lee https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7948-1350, Dae Hoon Jeong https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9464-5763, Min Chul Choi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4509-6731, Youn Jin Choi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4699-2116, Jae-Kwan Lee https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3101-6403, Tae-Hwe Heo https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8054-4448, Kyung-Jin Min https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5783-4968 [email protected], and Su-Yeon Yu https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5488-5068 [email protected]Author Info & Affiliations
Volume 15, Number 8
https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2025-0194
PDFFormats

Abstract

Aim: Cervical cancer, caused primarily by human papillomavirus infection, affects patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Despite research on quality of life in cancer patients, studies using the HINT-8 instrument, especially for cervical cancer, are scarce. This study evaluates the validity of HINT-8 in measuring HRQoL among Korean cervical cancer patients by comparing it with EQ-5D-5L. Materials & methods: Demographic and clinical characteristics were analyzed. Mean, median and standard deviations for each domain of both instruments were calculated. Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients assessed relationships between HINT-8 and EQ-5D-5L indices and domains. Results: Increased problem intensity in HINT-8 domains (e.g., stair climbing, pain and vitality) was correlated with decreased EQ-5D-5L index, indicating a higher response level in HINT-8 aligns with lower EQ-5D-5L scores. Significant variables were consistent across tools, showing no substantial functional difference. A strong correlation between HINT-8 and EQ-5D-5L indices (r = 0.771, p < 0.01) supports HINT-8’s effectiveness in evaluating HRQoL for cervical cancer patients. Conclusion: The HINT-8 demonstrated a strong correlation with the EQ-5D-5L index and a substantially lower ceiling effect, suggesting that it can capture subtle differences in HRQoL among cervical cancer patients. Furthermore, the HINT-8 may provide complementary information beyond the EQ-5D-5L by capturing distinct dimensions such as memory, sleep and happiness, which are not explicitly represented in the EQ-5D-5L descriptive system. These findings support the validity of the HINT-8 as a complementary instrument for assessing HRQoL in Korean cervical cancer patients.

Plain language summary: How well does the HINT-8 questionnaire measure quality of life in people with cervical cancer?

What is this article about?

Cervical cancer and its treatments can greatly affect how patients feel and function in daily life. To understand patients’ overall well-being, healthcare teams often ask them to complete questionnaires about their quality of life (QoL). This study looked at whether a Korean questionnaire called HINT-8 can accurately measure QoL in people with cervical cancer. The results from HINT-8 were compared with those from EQ-5D-5L, a widely used international tool.

What were the results?

People who reported more difficulties on the HINT-8 – such as pain, tiredness, trouble climbing stairs, sleep problems or low mood – also showed lower scores on the EQ-5D-5L. This means both tools reflected patients’ health in a similar way. The two tools showed a strong overall correlation. However, HINT-8 detected fewer ‘perfect health’ responses than EQ-5D-5L, meaning it was better at picking up differences among patients.

What do the results mean? Why is this important?

The findings show that HINT-8 is a useful and reliable tool for understanding the QoL of cervical cancer patients in Korea. Because it captures more subtle differences in patients’ experiences, it can help healthcare teams better monitor patients’ well-being and plan supportive care. This study is the first to confirm the usefulness of HINT-8 specifically for cervical cancer.

Shareable abstract

HINT-8 shows strong validity in assessing quality of life among cervical cancer patients, aligning closely with EQ-5D-5L while capturing more subtle health differences. This tool can support improved patient monitoring and care. #CervicalCancer #QualityOfLife #HINT8

Supplementary Material

File (supplementary data.docx)

References

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest
1.
National Cancer Information Center. An easy guide to early diagnosis and prevention of cervical cancer 2023. https://www.cancer.go.kr/lay1/bbs/S1T261C844/B/77/view.do?article_seq=37408&cpage=&rows=&condition=&keyword=&rn=10
Google Scholar
2.
Korea Central Cancer Registry, National Cancer Center. Annual Report of Cancer Statistics in Korea in 2021: Ministry of Health and Welfare. (2023). https://www.mohw.go.kr/board.es?mid=a10411010100&bid=0019&act=view&list_no=1482495&tag=&nPage=1
Google Scholar
3.
Cull A, Cowie VJ, Farquharson DI, Livingstone JR, Smart GE, Elton RA. Early stage cervical cancer: psychosocial and sexual outcomes of treatment. Br. J. Cancer 68(6), 1216–1220 (1993).
PubMed
Google Scholar
4.
Chun MS, Lee EH, Moon SM, Kang SH, Ryu HS. Medical-and-psychosocial factors influencing on the quality of life in patients with cervix cancer. Radiat. Oncol. J. 23(4), 201–210 (2005).
Google Scholar
5.
Van Wilder L, Pype P, Mertens F et al. Living with a chronic disease: insights from patients with a low socioeconomic status. BMC Fam. Pract. 22(1), 1–11 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
6.
Choi JS, Park YS, Kim JA, Park CS. International trends on patient-reported outcome measures for improving care quality and its implication for South Korea: focus on OECD PaRIS. Qual. Improv. Health Care 25(1), 11–28 (2019).
Google Scholar
7.
Lee HJ, Jo MW, Choi SH, Kim YJ, Oh KW. Development and psychometric evaluation of measurement instrument for Korean health-related quality of life. Public Health Wkly Rep. 9(24), 447–454 (2016).
Google Scholar
•• Describes the development and psychometric evaluation of the HINT-8, the primary instrument evaluated in the present study.
8.
European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. New commentary urges a rethink of quality of life metrics in cancer care economics in the context of EU HTA reform. (2025). https://www.eortc.org/blog/2025/05/19/new-commentary-quality-of-life-metrics-in-cancer-care-economics/
Google Scholar
9.
Lorgelly PK, Doble B, Rowen D, Brazier J. Condition-specific or generic preference-based measures in oncology? A comparison of the EORTC-8D and the EQ-5D-3L. Qual. Life Res. 26(5), 1163–1176 (2017).
PubMed
Google Scholar
10.
Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2015).
Google Scholar
11.
Kim EC, Hong CS, Lee JK, Park YS. Factors influencing health and quality of life among allergy and asthma patients: with specific focus on self-efficacy, social support and health management. Korean Psychologic. J. Culture Social Iss. 11(2), 143–181 (2005).
Google Scholar
12.
Lee H, Jo M, Choi S, Kim Y, Oh K. Development and psychometric evaluation of measurement instrument for Korean health-related quality of life. Public Health Wkly Rep. 9(24), 447–454 (2016).
Google Scholar
13.
Zhang L, Wang J, Chen T, Tian M, Zhou Q, Ren J. Symptom clusters and quality of life in cervical cancer patients receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy: the mediating role of illness perceptions. Front. Psych. 12, 807974 (2022).
Google Scholar
14.
Lee J, Ahn J. A study on deriving a conversion formula using mapping between EQ-5D and HINT-8 instruments. Korean J. Health Econ. Policy 25(1), 77–103 (2019).
Google Scholar
15.
Kim SY, Shim JY, Won WJ, Sun WS, Park HK, Lee JK. The development of Korean Health Related Quality of Life Scale (KQUOLS): testing reliability and validity. J. Korean Acad. Fam. Med. 21(3), 382–394 (2000).
Google Scholar
16.
Kim SH, Kim M. Validity of the health-related quality of life instrument with 8 items (HINT-8) in the Korean elderly: a cross-sectional study. J. Korean Gerontol. Nurs. 24(3), 248–256 (2022).
Google Scholar
• Provides prior evidence on the validity of the HINT-8 in a Korean population.
17.
Jo MW. Valuation of Korean Health-related Quality of Life Instrument with 8 Items (HINT-8). Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Report No.: 11-1352159-000695-01. (2017).
Google Scholar
18.
EuroQol Group. EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy (New York) 16(3), 199–208 (1990).
Google Scholar
19.
Jo MW, Ahn JH, Kim SH et al. The valuation of EQ-5D-5L health states in Korea. In: Research Report, 1–122 (2012).
Google Scholar
•• Provides the Korean EQ-5D-5L valuation set used to calculate EQ-5D-5L utility values.
20.
Cohen J. A power primer. In: Methodological Issues and Strategies in Clinical Research. 4th Edition. Kazdin AE (Ed.). American Psychological Association, DC, USA, 279–284 (2016).
Google Scholar
21.
Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. Int. J. Med. Educ. 2, 53–55 (2011).
PubMed
Google Scholar
22.
Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J. Chiropr. Med. 15(2), 155–163 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
23.
He Y, Pang Y, Su Z et al. Symptom burden, psychological distress, and symptom management status in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer: a multicenter study in China. ESMO Open 7(6), 100595 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
24.
Burucu R, Cantekin I. Psychological resilience, symptom burden, and supportive care needs in chemotherapy patients: a path analysis. Brain Behavior 15(11), e70851 (2025).
PubMed
Google Scholar
25.
Hong G-U, Koo BS, Kim M-J et al. Validation of the health-related quality of life instrument with 8 items for assessing health-related quality of life in patients with oropharyngeal cancer: a comparison with the EQ-5D-5L. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 23(1), 104 (2025).
PubMed
Google Scholar
26.
Lee T-K, Lee S-Y, Cho E. Psychometric properties of the health-related quality of life instrument with 8 items: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 24(1), 47 (2026).
PubMed
Google Scholar
27.
Tax C, Steenbergen ME, Zusterzeel PL, Bekkers RL, Rovers MM. Measuring health-related quality of life in cervical cancer patients: a systematic review of the most used questionnaires and their validity. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 17(1), 1–9 (2017).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• Summarizes commonly used health-related quality of life instruments and their validity in cervical cancer patients.
28.
Park J, Kim Y, Kim J et al. Health-Related Quality of Life of patients with Cervical Cancer according to the duration of treatment and Cancer progression. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 23(6), 1945 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
29.
Kim SH, Hwang JS, Kim TW, Hong YS, Jo M-W. Validity and reliability of the EQ-5D for cancer patients in Korea. Support. Care Cancer 20(12), 3155–3160 (2012).
PubMed
Google Scholar
30.
Jyani G, Chauhan AS, Rai B, Ghoshal S, Srinivasan R, Prinja S. Health-related quality of life among cervical cancer patients in India. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 30(12), 1887–1892 (2020).
PubMed
Google Scholar
31.
Endarti D, Riewpaiboon A, Thavorncharoensap M, Praditsitthikorn N, Hutubessy R, Kristina SA. Evaluation of health-related quality of life among patients with cervical cancer in Indonesia. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 16(8), 3345–3350 (2015).
PubMed
Google Scholar
|