ArticleScientific reports2019
The Relationship Between Evaluation Methods for Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical effects of different virtual reality presentation content on anxiety and pain: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Assessment tools for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a narrative review of clinician, patient-reported, and objective measures.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Review
- Eye Pain Caused by Epithelial Damage in the Central Cornea in Aqueous-Deficient Dry Eye.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Evaluation of perception threshold and pain in patients with Parkinson's disease using PainVisionFrontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- PainVision-based evaluation of brain potentials: a novel approach for quantitative pain assessment.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Establishment of the menthol test as a clinical evaluation method for oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy.Fujita medical journal · 2022Article
- Acupuncture Relieved Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Pilot Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Prospective Evaluation of Health Care Provider and Patient Assessments in Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neurotoxicity.Neurology · 2021Observational
- Evaluation of Eye-Pain Severity between Dry-Eye Subtypes.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Acute chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy due to oxaliplatin administration without cold stimulation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Article
- Long-Term Prevalence of Sensory Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy for 5 Years after Adjuvant FOLFOX Chemotherapy to Treat Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Neuropathy experienced by colorectal cancer patients receiving oxaliplatin: A qualitative study to validate the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity scale.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numbness and pain are currently evaluated using subjective methods such as the visual analogue scale (VAS). PainVision (PV) is an analytical instrument that was designed to quantitatively assess sense perception and nociception in patients. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is one of the most important adverse events that renders prolonged chemotherapy difficult. To assess the features of CIPN, we aimed to compare PV methods with existing methods. A total of 73 patients received oxaliplatin for metastatic colorectal cancer. Registered patients included 37 men and 36 women in the range of 37 to 89 years (median 70). CIPN was evaluated a total of 483 times (median per patient six times). Our study examined the correlation between evaluation methods of CIPN using VAS and PV, respectively. The average VAS (hand), VAS (foot) and PV scores of CIPN were 18.4 (range: 0-100), 23.8 (range: 0-100), and 24.7 (range: 0-496), respectively. VAS (hand), VAS (foot), and FACT/GOG-NTX (NTX2, NTX4 and NTX8) were significantly correlated with PV. PV showed no correlation with a Disk-Criminator or the monofilament test used as a quantitative evaluation. The evaluation of CIPN is complex, and further improvement is required for evaluation with PV.
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.