Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34195393›Full record

ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2021

Evaluation of skin reactions during proton beam radiotherapy - Patient-reported versus clinician-reported.

Marie-Louise Möllerberg, Ulrica Langegård, Birgitta Johansson, Emma Ohlsson-Nevo, Per Fransson, Karin Ahlberg, Petra Witt-Nyström, Katarina Sjövall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

8 authors.

Marie-Louise MöllerbergRI.SE (Research Institute of Sweden), Scheelevägen 17, SE-223 70 Lund, Sweden.
Ulrica LangegårdInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Birgitta JohanssonExperimental Oncology, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden.
Emma Ohlsson-NevoUniversity Healthcare Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Sweden.
Per FranssonDepartment of Nursing, Umeå University, and Department of Cancercentrum, Norrlands University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden.
Karin AhlbergInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Petra Witt-NyströmDanish Centre for Particle Therapy, Aarhus, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 25, DK-8200 Aarhus, Denmark.
Katarina SjövallFaculty of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, SE-291 88 Kristianstad, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSkin reaction is a common side-effect of radiotherapy and often only assessed as clinician-reported outcome (CRO). The aim was to examine and compare patient-reported outcome (PRO) of skin reactions with CRO for signs of acute skin reactions for patients with primary brain tumour receiving proton beam radiotherapy (PBT). A further aim was to explore patients' experiences of the skin reactions.

methodsAcute skin reactions were assessed one week after start of treatment, mid-treatment and end of treatment among 253 patients with primary brain tumour who underwent PBT. PRO skin reactions were assessed with the RSAS and CRO according to the RTOG scale. Fleiss' kappa was performed to measure the inter-rater agreement of the assessments of skin reactions.

resultsThe results showed a discrepancy between PRO and CRO acute skin reactions. Radiation dose was associated with increased skin reactions, but no correlations were seen for age, gender, education, occupation, other treatment or smoking. There was a poor agreement between patients and clinicians (κ = -0.016) one week after the start of PBT, poor (κ = -0.045) to (κ = 0.396) moderate agreement at mid treatment and poor (κ = -0.010) to (κ = 0.296) moderate agreement at end of treatment. Generally, patients' symptom distress toward skin reactions was low at all time points.

conclusionThe poor agreement between PRO and CRO shows that the patient needs to be involved in assessments of skin reactions for a more complete understanding of skin reactions due to PBT. This may also improve patient experience regarding involvement in their own care.

Indexed as

Clinician-reportedPatient-reported outcomePrimary brain tumourProton therapyRadiotherapySkin reaction

Identifiers

PMID34195393
PMCPMC8233127

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.