Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32853122›Full record

Trial reportJCO oncology practice2021

Electronic Patient Reporting of Adverse Events and Quality of Life: A Prospective Feasibility Study in General Oncology.

Fiona Kennedy, Kate Absolom, Beverly Clayton, Zoe Rogers, Kathryn Gordon, Elaine O'Connell Francischetto, Jane M Blazeby, Julia Brown, Galina Velikova

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JCO oncology practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2026
    Article
  10. Scoping review of oncology clinical trials nursing: Roles, competencies, and evolving practice in cancer research.Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. A Text Message Intervention to Minimize the Time Burden of Cancer Care.NEJM catalyst innovations in care delivery · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Digital Health Applications in Oncology: An Opportunity to Seize.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Fiona KennedySection of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Kate AbsolomSection of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Beverly ClaytonSection of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Zoe RogersSection of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Kathryn GordonClinical Trial Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Elaine O'Connell FrancischettoMedical Research Council ConDuCT-II Hub and the Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Population Health Sciences Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Jane M BlazebyMedical Research Council ConDuCT-II Hub and the Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Population Health Sciences Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Julia BrownClinical Trial Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Galina VelikovaSection of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Patient Reported Outcomes Group, Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
University of Leeds · GBMedical Research Council · GBNIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 14384Cancer Research UK 25447Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAdverse event (AE) reporting is essential in clinical trials. Clinician interpretation can result in under-reporting; therefore, the value of patient self-reporting has been recognized. The National Cancer Institute has developed a Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) for direct patient AE reporting. A nonrandomized prospective cohort feasibility study aimed to explore the compliance and acceptability of an electronic (Internet or telephone) system for collecting patient self-reported AEs and quality of life (QOL).

methodsOncology patients undergoing treatment (chemotherapy, targeted agents, hormone therapy, radiotherapy, and/or surgery) at 2 hospitals were sent automated weekly reminders to complete PRO-CTCAE once a week and QOL (for a maximum of 12 weeks). Patients had to speak/understand English and have access to the Internet or a touch-tone telephone. Primary outcome was compliance (proportion of expected questionnaires), and recruitment rate, attrition, and patient/staff feedback were also explored.

resultsOf 520 patients, 249 consented (47.9%)-mean age was 62 years, 51% were male, and 70% were married-and 230 remained on the study at week 12. PRO-CTCAE was completed at 2,301 (74.9%) of 3,074 timepoints and QOL at 749 (79.1%) of 947 timepoints. Individual weekly/once every 4 weeks compliance reduced over time but was more than 60% throughout. Of 230 patients, 106 (46.1%) completed 13 or more PRO-CTCAE, and 136 (59.1%) of 230 patients completed 4 QOL questionnaires. Most were completed on the Internet (82.3%; mean age, 60.8 years), which was quicker, but older patients preferred the telephone option (mean age, 70.0 years). Positive feedback was received from patients and staff.

conclusionSelf-reporting of AEs and QOL using an electronic home-based system is feasible and acceptable. Implementation of this approach in cancer clinical trials may improve the precision and accuracy of AE reporting.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsQuality of LifeAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAgedElectronicsFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID32853122
PMCPMC8202059
OpenAlexW3080741446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.