ArticleBMJ open2020
Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures of self-management for cancer survivors: a systematic review protocol using COSMIN methodology.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSelf-management is an important strategy for cancer survivors. Evaluating self-management is essential for planning nursing interventions that promote self-management and for measuring the contribution of nursing to health outcomes. Many patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been designed and used to assess self-management in cancer survivors. However, it is unclear which PROM has the best reliability and validity. Therefore, the goal is to systematically review the psychometric properties of existing self-management PROMs and determine which PROM is best for cancer survivors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will be conducted according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines for systematic reviews of PROMs. Ten electronic literature databases (PubMed, EMBASE and so on) and two websites for PROMs will be searched from inception to 1 March 2020. Studies testing the psychometric properties of PROMs assessing self-management for cancer survivors, published in either English or Chinese, will be included. Two independent reviewers determined the eligibility of the studies and will independently extract the data. Risk of bias will be assessed using the COSMIN risk-of-bias checklist, and the quality of the results will be assessed using specific COSMIN quality criteria. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: It is not necessary to obtain ethical approval for this systematic review protocol. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a relevant conference. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020149120.
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.