Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30484013›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2019

Evaluation of quality of care in relation to health-related quality of life of patients diagnosed with brain tumor: a novel clinic for proton beam therapy.

Ulrica Langegård, Karin Ahlberg, Per Fransson, Birgitta Johansson, Katarina Sjövall, Thomas Bjork-Eriksson, Emma Ohlsson-Nevo, Proton Care Study Group

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ulrica LangegårdInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Arvid Wallgrens backe, Box 457, 405 30, Göteborg, Sweden. ulrica.langegard@gu.se.
Karin AhlbergInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Arvid Wallgrens backe, Box 457, 405 30, Göteborg, Sweden.
Per FranssonDepartment of Nursing, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Birgitta JohanssonExperimental Oncology, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Katarina SjövallDepartment of Oncology, Skane University Hospital, Scania, Sweden.
Thomas Bjork-ErikssonDepartment of Oncology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Emma Ohlsson-NevoUniversity Healthcare Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Proton Care Study Group
University of Gothenburg · SEÖrebro University · SEScania (Sweden) · SEUppsala University Hospital · SE

Funding

Cancer Research Foundation in Northern Sweden CAN2015/428Cancer Research Foundation in Northern Sweden CAN 2016/809
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePatients with brain tumors constitute a vulnerable group, and it is important that they receive the highest quality of care (QoC). The study aim was to describe the perceptions of QoC and its association with health-related quality of life in brain tumor patients undergoing proton beam therapy in a newly established clinic.

methodData were collected at the start of treatment and after 3 and 6 weeks. Adult patients (≥ 18 years old) with brain tumors (n = 186) completed two self-administered questionnaires: a modified Quality from the Patients' Perspective, which measures perceived reality and subjective importance of care, and the EORTC QLQ-C30. Data were analyzed using parametric and non-parametric statistical tests.

resultsThe perceived QoC was highest for treatment information and lowest for dietician and smoking information, whereas interaction with doctors and nurses was rated as the most important aspect of quality of care. Subjective importance ratings were significantly higher than perceived reality ratings for 60% of items. A better global health was moderately correlated with a higher perceived support for fatigue.

conclusionsA need for quality improvement was identified for several aspects of patient care. Greater symptom distress during the treatment period led to greater perceived importance of symptom support. Ensuring QoC is complex and collaboration with other health care professionals is essential. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The clinic could improve QoC regarding information about possible symptoms, adjust care according to patient perceptions of importance, and involve patients in care decisions.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAmbulatory Care FacilitiesBrain NeoplasmsFatigueFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePerceptionProton TherapyQuality of Health CareQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesBrain tumorHealth-related quality of lifeProton beam therapyQuality of careRadiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID30484013
PMCPMC6541566
OpenAlexW2902734884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.