ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2020
Advances in the Functional Assessment of Patients with Sarcoma.
Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Remotely delivered resistance training program in adult sarcoma survivors: a pilot study.BMC cancer · 2026Trial
- A Multicomponent Training Program Improves Physical Function and Quality of Life for a Mesenchymal Chondrosarcoma Survivor Subjected to Internal Hemipelvectomy: A Case Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Functional assessment of patients with osteosarcoma may yield unique insights into the guide and advance treatment. A range of patient-reported outcomes has been validated, including general health and condition-specific measures as well as computer adaptive testing. Health state utility measures, which facilitate comparative-effectiveness research, are also available. Beyond these surveys, and laboratory-dependent gait analyses, is the potential for real-world evaluation through research-oriented and consumer-oriented accelerometers. Initial studies have shown promising validity of these activity trackers and may also have implications for traditional oncologic outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32483728What 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.