Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23680096›Full record

ArticleHealth economics review2013

Health-related quality of life questionnaires in lung cancer trials: a systematic literature review.

Kathrin Damm, Nicole Roeske, Christian Jacob

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health economics review, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Therapeutic vaccines for advanced non-small cell lung cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Underlying dimensions of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in a Cuban population of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2020
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Observational
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

3 authors.

Kathrin DammCenter for Health Economics Research Hannover (CHERH), Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany. kd@ivbl.uni-hannover.de.
Nicole Roeske
Christian Jacob

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLung cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer deaths. Treatment goals are the relief of symptoms and the increase of overall survival. With the rising number of treatment alternatives, the need for comparable assessments of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) parameters grows. The aim of this paper was to identify and describe measurement instruments applied in lung cancer patients under drug therapy.

methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review at the beginning of 2011 using the electronic database Pubmed.

resultsA total of 43 studies were included in the review. About 17 different measurement instruments were identified, including 5 generic, 5 cancer-specific, 4 lung cancer-specific and 3 symptom-specific questionnaires. In 29 studies at least 2 instruments were used. In most cases these were cancer and lung cancer-specific ones. The most frequently used instruments are the EORTC QLQ-C30 and its lung cancer modules LC13 or LC17. Only 5 studies combined (lung) cancer-specific questionnaires with generic instruments.

conclusionsThe EORTC-C30 and EORTC-LC13 are the most frequently used health-related quality of life measurement instruments in pharmacological lung cancer trials.

Identifiers

PMID23680096
PMCPMC3666900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.