Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33451330›Full record

SynthesisHealth and quality of life outcomes2021

An assessment of the use of patient reported outcome measurements (PROMs) in cancers of the pelvic abdominal cavity: identifying oncologic benefit and an evidence-practice gap in routine clinical practice.

Miss Charlotte L Moss, Ajay Aggarwal, Asad Qureshi, Benjamin Taylor, Teresa Guerrero-Urbano, Mieke Van Hemelrijck

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Clinic-based perspectives on the integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in a tertiary cancer center.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Value-Based Care in Systemic Therapy: The Way Forward.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Endometriosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021
    Review
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

6 authors.

Miss Charlotte L MossKing's College London, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Translational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), Guy's Hospital, 3rd Floor Bermondsey Wing, Great Maze Pond, London, SE1 9RT, UK. charlotte.moss@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4354-8987
Ajay AggarwalComprehensive Cancer Centre, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Asad QureshiComprehensive Cancer Centre, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Benjamin TaylorComprehensive Cancer Centre, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Teresa Guerrero-UrbanoComprehensive Cancer Centre, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Mieke Van HemelrijckKing's College London, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Translational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), Guy's Hospital, 3rd Floor Bermondsey Wing, Great Maze Pond, London, SE1 9RT, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient reported outcome measurements (PROMs) are emerging as an important component of patient management in the cancer setting, providing broad perspectives on patients' quality of life and experience. The use of PROMs is, however, generally limited to the context of randomised control trials, as healthcare services are challenged to sustain high quality of care whilst facing increasing demand and financial shortfalls. We performed a systematic review of the literature to identify any oncological benefit of using PROMs and investigate the wider impact on patient experience, in cancers of the pelvic abdominal cavity specifically.

methodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted using MEDLINE (Pubmed) and Ovid Gateway (Embase and Ovid) until April 2020. Studies investigating the oncological outcomes of PROMs were deemed suitable for inclusion.

resultsA total of 21 studies were included from 2167 screened articles. Various domains of quality of life (QoL) were identified as potential prognosticators for oncologic outcomes in cancers of the pelvic abdominal cavity, independent of other clinicopathological features of disease: 3 studies identified global QoL as a prognostic factor, 6 studies identified physical and role functioning, and 2 studies highlighted fatigue. In addition to improved outcomes, a number of included studies also reported that the use of PROMs enhanced both patient-clinician communication and patient satisfaction with care in the clinical setting.

conclusionsThis review highlights the necessity of routine collection of PROMs within the pelvic abdominal cancer setting to improve patient quality of life and outcomes.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAbdominal NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPelvic NeoplasmsProfessional Practice GapsQuality of LifeHealth related quality of lifeOverall survivalPatient reported outcome measurementsPelvic abdominal cancersPrognostic factors

Identifiers

PMID33451330
PMCPMC7810193

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.