Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32476819›Full record

ReviewSarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG2017

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in sarcoidosis.

Rikke Flor Thunold, Anders Løkke, Adam Langballe Cohen, Hilberg Ole, Elisabeth Bendstrup

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Quality of Life in Sarcoidosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Risk of depression and anxiety in 7.302 patients with sarcoidosis: a nationwide cohort study.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2024
    Article
  8. The Symptoms of Pulmonary Sarcoidosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Comprehensive Care for Patients with Sarcoidosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020
    Review
  14. Predictors of cough-specific and generic quality of life in sarcoidosis patients.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2020
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rikke Flor ThunoldDepartment of Internal Medicine Orkdale, St. Olavs University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
Anders LøkkeDepartment of Respiratory Diseases and Allergology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Adam Langballe CohenDepartment of Internal Medicine Orkdale, St. Olavs University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway.
Hilberg OleDepartment of Medicine, Lillebaelt Hospital, Vejle, Denmark.
Elisabeth BendstrupDepartment of Respiratory Diseases and Allergology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Aarhus University Hospital · DKLillebaelt Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with sarcoidosis present with a variety of symptoms which may impair many aspects of physical and mental well-being. Traditionally, clinicians have been concerned with physical health aspects of sarcoidosis, assessing disease activity and severity with radiological imaging, pulmonary function and blood tests. However, the most reported symptom of sarcoidosis patients, fatigue, has been shown not to correlate with the most commonly used parameters for monitoring disease activity. Studies have shown poor agreement between physicians and patients in assessing sarcoidosis symptoms. This underlines the importance of patient reported outcomes (PROs) in addition to traditional outcomes in order to provide a complete evaluation of the effects of interventions in clinical trials and everyday clinical assessment of sarcoidosis. We have undertaken a systematic review to identify and provide an overview of PRO concepts used in sarcoidosis assessment the past 20 years and to evaluate the tools used for measuring these concepts, called patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Various PROMs have been used. By categorizing these PROMs according to outcome we identified the key PRO concepts for sarcoidosis to be Health Status and Quality of Life, Dyspnea, Fatigue, Depression, Anxiety and Stress and Miscellaneous. There is no perfect sarcoidosis-specific PROM to cover all concepts and future intervention studies should therefore contain multiple complementary questionnaires. Based on our findings we recommend the Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAS) for assessing fatigue. Dyspnea scores should be chosen based on their purpose; more research is needed to examine their validity in sarcoidosis. The Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale (MRC) can be used to screen for dyspnea and the Baseline Dyspnea Index (BDI) to detect changes in dyspnea. We recommend The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment instrument (WHOQOL-100) for assessing quality of life, although a shorter questionnaire would be preferable. For assessing health status we recommend the Sarcoidosis Assessment Tool (SAT), and have great expectations for this new and promising assessment tool. Supplementary to the WASOG meeting of 2011's recommendation on assessing QoL, we recommend incorporating fatigue, dyspnea and HS assessment in clinical trials and everyday clinical assessment of sarcoidosis.

Indexed as

clinical assessmentclinical trialpatient reported outcomePROPROMquestionnairessarcoidosis

Identifiers

PMID32476819
PMCPMC7170118
OpenAlexW2620437052

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.