Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30370443›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2018

Patient-Centered Outcomes in Bladder Cancer.

John L Gore

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

1 author.

John L GoreDepartment of Urology, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific St, Box 356510, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA. jlgore@uw.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo summarize current knowledge on patient-prioritized outcomes for their bladder cancer care. RECENT

findingsPatient-centered outcomes research seeks to help patients identify the right treatment for the right patient at the right time in their care. As such, patient-centered outcomes research relies on studying a treatment's impact on patient-centered outcomes. Some outcomes, like survival, are commonly prioritized by patients and by clinical experts. Patients often place greater emphasis than experts on quality of life outcomes. Thus, many patient-centered outcomes are also patient-reported outcomes. Unique domains that are often prioritized by patients, but overlooked by experts, include the costs and financial impact of care, anxiety, and depression related to a health condition, and the impact of a condition or its treatment on a caregiver or loved one. Patient-centered outcomes are realizing greater recognition for their innate importance and potential to augment the impact of research studies. Although patient-centered outcomes are often patient-reported outcomes, this is not universal. Unique to bladder cancer, the availability of a research-oriented Patient Survey Network intended to identify research questions that are important to patients may be an opportunity to broadly solicit input on patient-centered outcomes for bladder cancer research questions.

Indexed as

Patient Outcome AssessmentQuality of LifeAnxietyCarcinoma, Transitional CellCaregiversCost of IllnessDepressionHealth Care CostsHumansPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsBladder cancerHealth outcomesPatient-centered outcomes researchQuality of life

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.