Observational studyCancer medicine2020
Validation of the Dutch version of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System.
Observational study in Cancer medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding symptom occurrence and treatment in the palliative phase for people with intellectual disabilities: a protocol for a mixed-methods study.BMC palliative care · 2026Observational
- Article
- Development and testing of a predictive model of symptoms for pain in community-dwelling frail older people in palliative care.BMC palliative care · 2025Observational
- Timely integration of palliative care into oncology care for patients with bone metastases at the radiotherapy department: A pilot study on acceptability and feasibility.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Use of brief, simple anxiety assessment tools in palliative care - yes, we can: a cross-sectional observational study of anxiety visual analog scale and numeric rating scale.BMC palliative care · 2025Observational
- Validating the socio-spiritual items of the Utrecht Symptom Diary-4 Dimensional: Content and construct validity.Palliative medicine · 2025Observational
- Validation of 11 added items of the outpatient version of the Utrecht Symptom Diary in patients receiving chemotherapy or targeted therapy.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Observational
- A comparison of the prevalence of dry mouth and other symptoms using two different versions of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System on an inpatient palliative care unit.BMC palliative care · 2024Article
- Article
- 'It is important to feel invited': what patients require when using the Utrecht Symptom Diary - 4 Dimensional, a qualitative exploration.Palliative care and social practice · 2024Article
- Experience or perception: What healthcare providers need when using the Utrecht Symptom Diary-4 Dimensional, a mixed-methods study.Palliative care and social practice · 2024Article
- Measurement and documentation of quality indicators for the end-of-life care of hospital patients a nationwide retrospective record review study.BMC palliative care · 2023Article
- Dry mouth in patients with a life-limiting condition or frailty: a study protocol for two intervention studies and a nested qualitative sub-study (the Dry mOuth Project, DROP).BMC palliative care · 2023Article
- Update on Prevalence of Pain in Patients with Cancer 2022: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2023Review
- Assessment of patient symptom burden and information needs helps tailoring palliative care consultations: An observational study.European journal of cancer care · 2022Observational
- Validation of the Dutch version of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System.Cancer medicine · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Utrecht Symptom Diary (USD) is a Dutch and adapted version of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, a patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) tool to asses and monitor symptoms in cancer patients. This study analyses the validity and responsiveness of the USD and the cutoff points to determine the clinical significance of a symptom score.
methodsObservational longitudinal cohort study including adult in- and outpatients treated in an academic hospital in the Netherlands who completed at least one USD as part of routine care (2012-2019). The distress thermometer and problem checklist (DT&PC) was used as a reference PROM. Content, construct and criterion validity, responsiveness, and cutoff points are shown with prevalences, area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, Chi-squared test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and positive and negative predictive values, respectively.
resultsA total of 3913 patients completed 22 400 USDs. Content validity was confirmed for all added USD items with prevalences of ≥22%. All USD items also present on the DT&PC demonstrated a good criterion validity (ROC >0.8). Construct validity was confirmed for the USD as a whole and for the items dry mouth, dysphagia and well-being (P < .0001). USD scores differed significantly for patients when improving or deteriorating on the DT&PC which confirmed responsiveness. Optimal cutoff points (3 or 4) differed per symptom.
conclusionThe USD is a valid 12-item PROM for the most prevalent symptoms in cancer patients, which has content, criterion, and construct validity, and detects clinically important changes over time, in both curative and palliative phase.
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.