ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2014
Is breathlessness what the professional says it is? Analysis of patient and professionals' assessments from a German nationwide register.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- What gets measured in palliative care? A review and synthesis of routine data collection in 16 countries.Health policy OPEN · 2025Review
- [Concept-dependent and -independent care effects of site-specific care concepts using "pain" as an example].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2024Article
- Exploring Risk Factors of Unexpected Death, Using Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC) Measures, among Terminal Patients Receiving Palliative Care in Taiwan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- A feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of a paramedic-administered breathlessness management intervention for acute-on-chronic breathlessness (BREATHE).ERJ open research · 2021Article
- Prevalence of hyponatremia in inpatients with incurable and life-limiting diseases and its association with physical symptoms-a retrospective descriptive study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBreathlessness is a common and distressing symptom in patients with advanced disease. Patients' self-report is deemed to be the most valid method of symptom assessment. When patients are not capable of self-assessment, professionals' assessment is often used as alternative but evidence on the validity is conflicting. The aim of this study was to compare self- and professionals' assessment of breathlessness regarding presence and severity in patients with advanced disease.
methodsSecondary analysis of a cross-sectional, multi-centre and nationwide register (HOspice and Palliative Care Evaluation (HOPE)). Documented inpatients from hospices and palliative care units from 2006 to 2008 who completed the self-assessed MInimal DOcumentation System (MIDOS) were included. Professionals' assessment were based on the integrated symptom and problem checklist (symptom scores, 0-3). Cohen's kappa (κ) was used to estimate the 'level of agreement' (LoA).
resultsTwo thousand six hundred twenty-three patients (mean age, 66.9 (SD, 12.8); 54.4% female; median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score, 3; 95.9% with malignant disease) were analysed. Prevalence of breathlessness was 53.4% (1,398 patients) by professionals' and 53.1% (1,410 patients) by self-assessment. Presence was correctly evaluated by professionals in 80.9% of cases (sensitivity, 81.8%; specificity, 79.8%). Severity of breathlessness was correctly estimated in 65.7% of cases. LoA was good (κ=0.62) for the evaluation of presence of breathlessness and moderate (κ=0.5) for the estimation of severity. The proportion of over- or underestimated scores was similar.
conclusionsIf patient's self-rating, the gold standard of symptom assessment, is not possible, professionals' assessment might be a valid alternative, at least for assessing the presence of breathlessness.
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.