Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32405964›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2021

Feasibility of implementing a cervix cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measure in routine ambulatory clinics.

Soha Atallah, Lisa Barbera, Matthew Folwell, Doris Howell, ZhihuiAmy Liu, Jennifer Croke

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  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

6 authors.

Soha AtallahDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6802-6790
Lisa BarberaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada.
Matthew FolwellDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada.
Doris HowellPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada.
ZhihuiAmy LiuPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada.
Jennifer CrokeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada. Jennifer.croke@rmp.uhn.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the implementation of a cervix cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measure, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Cervical Cancer module (EORTC QLQ-CX24), into gynecologic oncology clinics.

methodsThis was a prospective, multi-institutional, cross-sectional study involving cervix cancer patients previously treated with curative intent radiotherapy who were attending routine follow-up appointments. Between January 2017 and August 2018, eligible patients were approached to complete the EORTC QLQ-CX24 prior to their clinical encounter and then review it with their oncologist. Patient and oncologist experience was evaluated using Feedback Questionnaires following the encounter. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the results of the EORTC QLQ-CX24 and Feedback Questionnaires. Open-ended questions within the Feedback Questionnaires were analyzed to identify themes.

resultsEighty-four patients consented to participate in the study. Of these, 80 (95.2%) completed the EORTC QLQ-CX24 and 76 (90.4%) completed both the EORTC QLQ-CX24 and the Feedback Questionnaires. There were high rates of completion for most items within the EORTC QLQ-CX24 (93-98%), except for items pertaining to vaginal symptoms and sexual health (34-35%). All eligible oncologists participated (n = 9). Overall, patients and oncologists positively endorsed use of the questionnaire during clinical encounters. The majority of patients (80%) and oncologists (89%) reported use of the questionnaire improved communication, including discussion of sensitive topics. Interestingly, only a minority of patients and oncologists stated a perceived preference for electronic completion (18% and 44%, respectively).

conclusionImplementation of the EORTC QLQ-CX24 in gynecologic oncology clinics was feasible and acceptable according to patients and oncologists.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAmbulatory Care FacilitiesCross-Sectional StudiesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesPsychometricsQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCervix cancerPatient-reported outcomesQuality of lifeRadiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID32405964

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.