ArticleScandinavian journal of pain2016
Using Patient Reported Outcomes in Oncology Clinical Practice.
Article in Scandinavian journal of pain, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chronic urticaria and quality of life.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Using a Heuristic Tool to Improve Symptom Self-Management in Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Self-efficacy for cancer self-management in the context of COVID-19: a cross-sectional survey study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- The Lived Experience of Adult Cancer Survivors After Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Qualitative Study From Saudi Arabia.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessing Patient Readiness for an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Symptom Management Intervention in a Multisite Study.JCO oncology practice · 2024Article
- mHealth Coping Skills Training for Symptom Management (mCOPE) for colorectal cancer patients in early to mid-adulthood: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2023Article
- Article
- Management of lung cancer patients' quality of life in clinical practice: a Delphi study.ESMO open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsPatient reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly being implemented into the care of patients with cancer. The use of a standard set of PROs (e.g., pain) in cancer is becoming established and there is interest in what additional PROs might provide valuable information. The goal of this observational study was to examine how the PROs of self-efficacy for pain and other symptoms assessed at the point of service were associated with pain, symptom severity and distress, and physical and psychosocial functioning in a sample of breast and gastrointestinal patients. We also sought to examine differences in these relationships by cancer type (breast and gastrointestinal) as well as understand differences in self-assessment mode (paper/pencil or electronic tablet).
methods178 patients with breast (n=65) and gastrointestinal cancer (n = 113) completed the Chronic Pain Self Efficacy Scale, M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General questionnaires. Measures were completed with paper and pencil and electronically using a tablet computer while patients waited for their clinical appointment. Responses from the initial completed questionnaires on both the paper and electronic instruments were analyzed.
resultsPatients' self-efficacy scores for pain and other symptoms correlated positively with pain, symptom severity and distress, and physical and psychosocial functioning; patients with lower levels of self-efficacy reported poorer outcomes and functioning overall. The results were independent of cancer type and mode of assessment. No statistically significant differences were found in the PROs when collected by electronic technology versus paper-pencil mode; patients were very satisfied with using the tablet computer to complete the PRO measures. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Our results suggest that self-efficacy for pain and symptom management may be a beneficial addition to clinic-based PRO assessment batteries for patients with cancer and other chronic diseases. Existing short, validated symptom self-efficacy scales could easily be integrated into clinical practice to help healthcare providers identify patients that might benefit from intervention. Study results also support existing research that suggests electronic approaches are a practical way to collect PRO data, including self-efficacy data, in the clinic. Overall, our data suggest that patients who have particularly low levels of self-efficacy for pain and symptom management may be at risk for higher levels of pain and disability. Thus, if self-efficacy for pain and symptom management were routinely collected at the time of clinical service, psychosocial interventions to improve self-efficacy for pain and symptom management, and in turn overall quality of life, could be implemented in a timely fashion.
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.