Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30982095›Full record

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

Measuring health-related quality of life in colorectal cancer patients: systematic review of measurement properties of the EORTC QLQ-CR29.

Anja van der Hout, Koen I Neijenhuijs, Femke Jansen, Cornelia F van Uden-Kraan, Neil K Aaronson, Mogens Groenvold, Bernhard Holzner, Caroline B Terwee, Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse, Pim Cuijpers and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Effectiveness of preoperative group education for patients with colorectal cancer: managing expectations.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Trial
  6. Quality of life assessment for colorectal cancer follow-up: A latent profile analysis of EORTC measures.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Quality of life following total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

11 authors.

Anja van der HoutDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Koen I NeijenhuijsDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Femke JansenDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cornelia F van Uden-KraanDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Neil K AaronsonDivision of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Mogens GroenvoldThe Research Unit, Department of Palliative Medicine, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, 20D, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, NV 2400, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Bernhard HolznerDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraβe 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Caroline B TerweeDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health institute, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1089a, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lonneke V van de Poll-FranseDivision of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Irma M Verdonck-de LeeuwDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. im.verdonck@vumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4507-4607

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding VUP 2014-7202
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe EORTC QLQ-CR29 is a patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate health-related quality of life among colorectal cancer patients in research and clinical practice. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate whether the initial positive results regarding the measurement properties of the QLQ-CR29 are confirmed in subsequent studies.

methodsA systematic search of Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies investigating the measurement properties of the QLQ-CR29 published up to January 2019. For the 11 included studies, data were extracted, methodological quality was assessed, results were synthesized, and evidence was graded according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology on the measurement properties: structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, construct validity (hypothesis testing, including known-group comparison, convergent and divergent validity), cross-cultural validity, and responsiveness.

resultsInternal consistency was rated as "sufficient," with low evidence. Reliability was rated as "insufficient," with moderate evidence. Construct validity (hypothesis testing; known-group comparison, convergent and divergent validity) was rated as "inconsistent," with moderate evidence. Structural validity, measurement error, and responsiveness were rated as "indeterminate" and could therefore not be graded.

conclusionThis review indicates that current evidence supporting the measurement properties of the QLQ-CR29 is limited. Additionally, better quality research is needed, taking into account the COSMIN methodology.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsHumansPsychometricsQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesColorectal cancerEORTC QLQ-CR29Health-related quality of lifeMeasurement propertyPatient-reported outcome measure (PROM)Systematic review

Identifiers

PMID30982095
PMCPMC6541702

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.