ArticleResearch in gerontological nursing2011
Combining extant datasets with differing outcome measures across studies of older adults after cancer surgery.
Article in Research in gerontological nursing, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- AAdvances in neural information processing systems · 2025Article
- Policy Research Challenges in Comparing Care Models for Dual-Eligible Beneficiaries.Policy, politics & nursing practice · 2017Article
- A Novel Analytic Technique to Measure Associations Between Circulating Biomarkers and Physical Performance Across the Adult Life Span.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2016Article
- Development and evaluation of an Individualized Outcome Measure (IOM) for randomized controlled trials in mental health.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2015Article
- Functional status in older women following gynecological cancer surgery: can choice of measure influence evidence for clinical practice?Geriatric nursing (New York, N.Y.)Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Combining extant datasets with differing outcome measures, an economical method to generate evidence guiding older adults' cancer care, may introduce heterogeneity leading to invalid study results. We recently conducted a study combining extant datasets from five oncology nurse-directed clinical trials (parent studies) using norm-based scoring to standardize the differing outcome measures. The purpose of this article is to describe and analyze our methods in the recently completed study. Despite addressing and controlling for heterogeneity, our analysis found statistically significant heterogeneity (p < 0.0001) in temporal trends among the five parent studies. We concluded that assessing heterogeneity in combined extant datasets with differing outcome measures is important to ensure similar magnitude and direction of findings across parent studies. Future research should include investigating reasons for heterogeneity to generate hypotheses about subgroup differences or differing measurement domains that may have an impact on outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.