SynthesisJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2021
Patient-reported outcomes of non-pharmacological interventions for endometrial cancer survivors: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mini-review: Perioperative pain management in gynecologic oncology - strategies and future directions.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Review
- Perceived importance of weight loss and exercise among endometrial cancer survivors with overweight or obesity: Implications for lifestyle modification interventions.Obesity science & practice · 2023Article
- Quality of life in endometrial cancer survivors by grade of disease.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this review was to assess the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions on endometrial cancer (EC) survivors' QOL, and their use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of non-pharmacological interventions that assessed the impact of intervention on EC survivors' general and domain-specific QOL (i.e., physical, psychological, and social well-being) using PROMs.
resultsOf the 3178 studies identified, 28 full-text articles were reviewed, and 10 were included in the review. Nine RCTs assessed at least one PROM as a primary outcome and six assessed a PROM as a secondary outcome, but few studies used validated PROMs. Significant improvements in general QOL were found in two studies, domain-specific QOL in three studies, and both general and domain-specific QOL in three studies; however, effect sizes ranged from small to large and no significant effects were found for social well-being and few were found for psychological well-being.
conclusionsFew non-pharmacological interventions for EC survivors targeted QOL, even though QOL was assessed as either a primary or secondary outcome of the RCT. Despite this, findings suggest that non-pharmacological interventions for EC survivors hold promise for improving general and domain-specific QOL. Use of validated PROMs would greatly enhance outcome reporting and facilitate comparisons across studies. More interventions are also needed that address social and psychological functioning in this population. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Our review highlights a need to (1) expand non-pharmacological RCTs for EC survivors, (2) increase the use of validated PROMs measuring QOL, and (3) address psychosocial domains of QOL when developing interventions for this population.
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.