Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25752884›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2015

Development and validation of the Lymphedema Symptom and Intensity Survey-Arm.

Sheila H Ridner, Mary S Dietrich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Impact of text reminders on pneumatic compression device (PCD) compliance in patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Ultrasound: Assessment of breast dermal thickness: Reliability, responsiveness to change, and relationship to patient-reported outcomes.Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2022
    Trial
  7. Advanced pneumatic compression for treatment of lymphedema of the head and neck: a randomized wait-list controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Body image and sexuality concerns in women with breast cancer-related lymphedema: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sheila H RidnerVanderbilt University School of Nursing, 461 21st Avenue South, Godchaux Hall, Nashville, TN, 37240, USA, sheila.ridner@vanderbilt.edu.
Mary S Dietrich
Vanderbilt University · US

Funding

VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY CTSA FOR PEDIATRIC RESEARCHUL1RR024975 · NCRR · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI BERNARD, GORDON RAPHAEL · 2007 to 2011
$45.7M
Lymphedema after breast cancer treatmentF31NR007854 · NINR · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI RIDNER, SHEILA H · 2001 to 2002
$84k
NCRR NIH HHS UL 1RR024975NINR NIH HHS 1 F31 NR07854-02NINR NIH HHS F31 NR007854NINR NIH HHS L30 NR010404
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this instrument development project was to create a self-report tool to evaluate arm lymphedema and associated symptoms in breast cancer survivors.

methodsThe Lymphedema Symptom Intensity and Distress Survey-Arm (LSIDS-A) was developed and tested in three phases: phase 1-literature review and expert panel; phase 2-preliminary validation; and phase 3-final validation.

resultsPhase 1: The most common symptoms experienced by breast cancer survivors with lymphedema were identified. A 52-item scale was developed. Phase 2: 128 community-dwelling breast cancer survivors (64 with lymphedema, 64 without lymphedema) completed the LSIDS-A. Feedback from the participants was that the format was "clear" and "made sense"; therefore, the response structure was left intact. Sixteen items were deleted leaving a 36-item revised instrument. Phase 3: Subsequent testing in a total sample of 236 breast cancer survivors with lymphedema was undertaken. The Cronbach's alpha reliability values for the overall intensity and distress scores were 0.93 and 0.94, respectively. The Kuder-Richardson values ranged from 0.66 to 0.92. Divergent validity evaluated against Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirebility Scale overall was acceptable (intensity, r s = 0.08; distress, r s  = -0.12). Convergent validity was acceptable as tested with multiple instruments (e.g., Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast +4, overall intensity r s   = -0.44, overall distress r s   = -.48)

conclusionsThe 30-item LSIDS-A is a valid and reliable instrument that can be used to assess arm lymphedema and its associated symptoms.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansLymphedemaMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsValidation Studies as Topic

Identifiers

PMID25752884
PMCPMC4554806
OpenAlexW2003566360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.