Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24841165›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2014

Quality-of-life assessment tools for men with prostate cancer.

Jonathan Bergman, Aaron Laviana

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Validation of the Brazilian Version of Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate-FACT-P (Version 4) in Prostate Cancer Patients.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Basic issues concerning health-related quality of life.Central European journal of urology · 2017
    Article
  5. 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

2 authors.

Jonathan BergmanDepartment of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, Box 951738, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1738, USA.
Aaron LavianaDepartment of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, Box 951738, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1738, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality-of-life assessment tools for men with prostate cancer have given patients and health-care providers a nuanced understanding not only of how long patients will survive, but also how well they will live. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) addresses the entire spectrum of human experience, including daily necessities, interpersonal relationships, physical and mental health, illness, and professional and personal happiness. Developing an HRQOL instrument is a methodologically rigorous process that requires fastidious attention to detail if the product is to be useful for patients and populations, and responsive to change over time. HRQOL instruments must be psychometrically sound, but also readily used by the target population. Instruments should ideally be administered by a neutral third party, to avoid bias of patients wanting to 'please' their physicians by masking underlying problems. The instruments used in HRQOL assessment can be general or specific to a particular disease process. General HRQOL domains assess overall well-being, typically with instruments that address general health perceptions, and social, emotional, and physical function. Disease-specific instruments might focus on how dysfunction in a particular organ or disease affects overall HRQOL. Several instruments specific to prostate cancer have been used on their own or in conjunction with more generic tools to assess HRQOL in men with prostate cancer.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeEvidence-Based MedicineHumansMalePatient Outcome AssessmentProstatic NeoplasmsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

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.