ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2017
Online tools for patient counseling in bladder and kidney cancer-ready for prime time?
Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cancer Resource and Information Support (CRIS) for Bladder Cancer Survivors and Their Caregivers: Development and Usability Testing Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gauging prognosis is a key element when facing treatment decisions in cancer care. Several prognostic tools, such as risk tables and nomograms are at hand to aid this process. In the context of patient-centered care, prognostic tools are of great interest to caregivers and -providers alike, as they can convey sizeable amounts of information and provide tailored, accurate estimates of prognosis. Given the rising number of prognostic tools in cancer care over the last two decades, and similarly, ever increasing presence of the Internet, we aimed to assess how this would translate into the availability of online tools for patient counseling. We used a modified systematic review to evaluate the web-based availability, format, and content of prognostic tools for bladder and kidney cancer care. Our search identified a total of twenty-three tools, offered by eight providers, which assessed a total of six (bladder cancer) and five (kidney cancer) different outcomes. Despite the restricted availability of online tools, we observed that the majority showed limited user-friendliness (including, for example, a statement/explanation of intended use, visualization of data, availability as application software for handheld devices). Only one tool included modifiable risk factors such as smoking behavior and body weight. Lastly, none of the tools incorporated genomic or molecular markers or treatment associated quality of life. Taken together, online tools for patient counseling in bladder and kidney cancer care are only beginning to align with the growing need in clinical reality. Further and future avenues include incorporation of health-related quality of life as well as genomic and biomarkers into prediction tools.
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.