ArticleMedical care2011
Complications among colorectal cancer survivors: SF-6D preference-weighted quality of life scores.
Article in Medical care, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perioperative or Postoperative Probiotics Reduce Treatment-Related Complications in Adult Colorectal Cancer Patients Undergoing Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Depression after stoma surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC psychiatry · 2023Pooled it
- Health State Utility Values for Ileostomies and Colostomies: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2018Pooled it
- Conversations for providers caring for patients with rectal cancer: Comparison of long-term patient-centered outcomes for patients with low rectal cancer facing ostomy or sphincter-sparing surgery.CA: a cancer journal for clinicians · 2016Pooled it
- Quality of life after rectal resection for cancer, with or without permanent colostomy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- The Hidden Pandemic: the Cost of Postoperative Complications.Current anesthesiology reports · 2022Review
- Validation of the Chinese EORTC chronic lymphocytic leukaemia module - application of classical test theory and item response theory.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Caregiving and mutuality among long-term colorectal cancer survivors with ostomies: qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018Article
- Rectal Cancer Survivors' Participation in Productive Activities.The Permanente journal · 2018Article
- Systematic review of health state utility values for economic evaluation of colorectal cancer.Health economics review · 2016Review
- Self-reported depression and perceived financial burden among long-term rectal cancer survivors.Psycho-oncology · 2016Article
- Activation for Health Management in Colorectal Cancer Survivors and Their Family Caregivers.Western journal of nursing research · 2016Article
- Health status, anxiety, and depressive symptoms following complicated and uncomplicated colorectal surgeries.International journal of colorectal disease · 2016Article
- Article
- Using a personalized measure (Patient Generated Index (PGI)) to identify what matters to people with cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2016Article
- Spiritual well-being in long-term colorectal cancer survivors with ostomies.Psycho-oncology · 2013Article
- Development of a chronic care ostomy self-management program.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSocietal preference-weighted health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores enable comparing multidimensional health states across diseases and treatments for research and policy.
objectiveTo assess the effects of living with a permanent intestinal stoma, compared with a major bowel resection, among colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors. RESEARCH
designCross-sectional multivariate linear regression analysis to explain preference-weighted HRQOL scores. SUBJECTS: In all, 640 CRC survivors (≥ 5 years) from 3 group model health maintenance organizations; ostomates and nonostomates with colorectal resections for CRC were matched on gender, age (± 5 years), time since diagnosis, and tumor site (rectum vs. colon). MEASURES: SF-6D scoring system was applied to Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 version 2 (SF-36v2); City of Hope Quality of Life-Ostomy; and Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index.
methodsSurvey of CRC survivors linked to respondents' clinical data extracted from health maintenance organization files.
resultsResponse rate was 52%. Ostomates and nonostomates had similar sociodemographic characteristics. Mean SF-6D score was 0.69 for ostomates, compared with 0.73 for nonostomates (P < 0.001), but other factors explained this difference. Complications of initial cancer surgery, and previous year comorbidity burden, and hospital use were negatively associated with SF-6D scores, whereas household income was positively associated.
conclusionsCRC survivors' SF-6D scores were not associated with living with a permanent ostomy after other factors were taken into account. Surgical complications, comorbidities, and metastatic disease lowered the preference-weighted HRQOL of CRC survivors with and without ostomies. Further research to understand and reduce late complications from CRC surgeries as well as associated depression is warranted.
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.