Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33664409›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Temporal stability of quality of life assessments in cancer patients.

Andreas Hinz, Thomas Schulte, Jörg Rassler, Markus Zenger, Kristina Geue

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Andreas HinzDepartment of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Str. 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. andreas.hinz@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.
Thomas SchulteRehabilitation Clinic Bad Oexen, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.
Jörg RasslerDepartment of Urology, St. Elisabeth Hospital, Leipzig, Germany.
Markus ZengerFaculty of Applied Human Studies, University of Applied Sciences Magdeburg and Stendal, Magdeburg, Germany.
Kristina GeueDepartment of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Str. 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality of life (QoL) is an important outcome criterion in cancer research and practice. Multiple studies have been performed to test the short-term temporal stability (1 day-2 weeks) of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire EORTC QLQ-C30, but its stability over longer periods of time is largely unknown. The EORTC QLQ-C30 was administered at two time points between 3 and 12 months apart in six samples of cancer patients with varying characteristics (N between 298 and 923). Averaged across the six samples, the coefficients of temporal stability (intra-class correlation coefficients ICC) were between 0.31 and 0.59 for the single scales. The 2-item global health/QoL scale showed a mean coefficient of 0.44. When the stability coefficients were calculated separately for males and females and for younger vs. older patients, no systematic gender or age differences were found in the temporal stability of the QoL scales, though the stability was slightly higher in males (vs. females) and in older subgroups (vs. younger subgroups). It is nearly impossible to predict the course a cancer patients' QoL will take over a several month period. Repeated measurements are necessary to track QoL developments.

Indexed as

PsychometricsQuality of LifeAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID33664409
PMCPMC7933346

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.