Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19421789›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2009

Distress and quality of life in primary high-grade brain tumor patients.

Elizabeth A Kvale, Rashmi Murthy, Richard Taylor, Jeannette Y Lee, L B Nabors

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Impact of consultation recordings on patient-reported outcomes in patients with brain tumors: a parallel randomized controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Distress in Neuro-Oncology Patients and Its Implications for Communication.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Development of screening questions for doctor-patient consultation assessing the quality of life and psychosocial burden of glioma patients: an explorative study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Elizabeth A KvaleBirmingham VA Medical Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. ekvale@aging.uab.edu
Rashmi Murthy
Richard Taylor
Jeannette Y Lee
L B Nabors

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

goals of workWe report on the routine use of the NCCN Distress Thermometer and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain (FACT-Br) to assess patient distress and quality of life in GBM patients. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between patient quality of life and distress. MATERIALS AND

methodsData from 50 GBM patients presenting to a neuro-oncology clinic were evaluated. Descriptive statistics and correlations between the distress score and the FACT-Br subscale scores were generated. MAIN

resultsThe mean distress score was 2.15 (std 2.66), and 28.9% of brain tumor patients identified a distress score of 4 or above. The mean FACT-Br total was 127.34 (std 21.29), with patients scoring lowest in the EWB (18.95 std 4.4) and FWB (15.06 std 6.80) subscales. No differences between demographic groups were identified with regard to distress or quality of life. Statistically significant correlations were identified between the distress score and the SWB (R = -0.46, P = 0.001) and EWB (R = -0.56, P = 0.001) subscales of the FACT-Br. Fifty percent of participants who did not complete the FACT-Br reported clinically significant distress, but this did not differ significantly from participants who completed it.

conclusionsAssessment of distress in brain tumor patients provides clinically relevant information and suggests interventions that may support quality of life. Further research is needed to explore the relationship between distress and quality of life. Current approaches to measuring quality of life in brain tumor patients may systematically undersample patients with advanced illness or significant psychosocial distress.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBrain NeoplasmsFemaleGlioblastomaHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsStress, PsychologicalYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID19421789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.