Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21246410›Full record

SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2011

Measurement and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes in surgery: an opportunity for improvement.

Paul J Karanicolas, Kai Bickenbach, Shiva Jayaraman, Andrea L Pusic, Daniel G Coit, Gordon H Guyatt, Murray F Brennan

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effective palliation and quality of life outcomes in studies of surgery for advanced, non-curative gastric cancer: a systematic review.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2012
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Paul J KaranicolasDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave., New York, NY 10065, USA. karanicp@mskcc.org
Kai Bickenbach
Shiva Jayaraman
Andrea L Pusic
Daniel G Coit
Gordon H Guyatt
Murray F Brennan
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USMcMaster University · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgery may have a profound effect on patients' health-related quality of life (QOL). To be optimally useful, trials that seek to guide clinical decision making should measure outcomes that are important to patients and report the results in a clinically meaningful way. We sought to explore how researchers currently measure and interpret QOL in surgical trials, using gastric cancer as a case study.

methodWe performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of gastric cancer surgery published between 1966 and 2009 that included at least one patient-reported outcome (PRO). Investigators assessed trial eligibility and extracted data in duplicate using standardized forms, then resolved disagreements by consensus.

resultsOur search identified 87 RCTs of gastric cancer surgery, of which 11 (13%) included at least one PRO. Ten RCTs measured one or more validated PROs, although six also included ad hoc measures. All manuscripts presented the results as raw scores and nine of the 11 trials identified a statistical difference between groups. All 11 manuscripts prominently reported the PRO results in the abstracts and conclusions, but only one discussed the clinical significance of the differences between groups.

conclusionsMost RCTs of gastric cancer surgery do not include measures of QOL and those that do suffer from important limitations. RCTs would be more useful to surgeons and patients if authors measured PROs and utilized existing approaches to present the results of PROs in ways that provide an intuitive sense of the magnitude of effects.

Indexed as

GastrectomyQuality of LifeHumansPatientsPsychometricsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStomach NeoplasmsSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID21246410
OpenAlexW2018671748

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.