Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34277020›Full record

ReviewNeuro-oncology practice2021

Systematic review on the use of patient-reported outcome measures in brain tumor studies: part of the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Patient-Reported Outcome (RANO-PRO) initiative.

Linda Dirven, Maartje E Vos, Tobias Walbert, Terri S Armstrong, David Arons, Martin J van den Bent, Jaishri Blakeley, Paul D Brown, Helen Bulbeck, Susan M Chang and 15 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuro-oncology practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Challenges in interpreting individual-level changes in health-related quality of life in patients with glioma using minimally important differences (MIDs) and a 4-point Likert scale.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

25 authors at 16 institutions in 6 countries.

Linda DirvenDepartment of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9157-9895
Maartje E VosDepartment of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Tobias WalbertDepartment of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Terri S ArmstrongNeuro-Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
David AronsNational Brain Tumor Society, Newton, Massachusetts, USA.
Martin J van den BentDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Jaishri BlakeleyDepartment of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Paul D BrownDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Helen BulbeckBrainstrust - The Brain Cancer People, Cowes, Isle of Wight, UK.
Susan M ChangDivision of Neuro-Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Corneel CoensStatistical Department, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium.
Mark R GilbertNeuro-Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Robin GrantDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Rakesh JalaliNeuro-Oncology Disease Management Group, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Danielle LeachNational Brain Tumor Society, Newton, Massachusetts, USA.
Heather LeeperNeuro-Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Tito MendozaDepartment of Symptom Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8122-5233
Lakshmi NayakCenter for Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Kathy OliverInternational Brain Tumour Alliance, Tadworth, Surrey, UK.
Jaap C ReijneveldDepartment of Neurology and Brain Tumor Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers (location VUmc), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Emilie Le RhunDepartments of Neurosurgery, Neurology and Brain Tumor Center, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Larry RubinsteinBiometric Research Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Michael WellerDepartment of Neurology and Brain Tumor Center, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1748-174X
Patrick Y WenCenter for Neuro-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Martin J B TaphoornDepartment of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
National Cancer Institute · USLeiden University Medical Center · NLCenter for Neuro-Oncology · USNational Brain Tumor Society · USUniversity of Zurich · CHAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLBrain Tumour Charity · GBEdinburgh Royal Infirmary · GBErasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer · BEHenry Ford Health System · USJohns Hopkins University · USMayo Clinic · USTata Memorial Hospital · INThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Patient-Reported Outcome (RANO-PRO) working group aims to provide guidance on the use of PROs in brain tumor patients. PRO measures should be of high quality, both in terms of relevance and other measurement properties. This systematic review aimed to identify PRO measures that have been used in brain tumor studies to date.

methodsA systematic literature search for articles published up to June 25, 2020 was conducted in several electronic databases. Pre-specified inclusion criteria were used to identify studies using PRO measures assessing symptoms, (instrumental) activities of daily living [(I)ADL] or health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adult patients with glioma, meningioma, primary central nervous system lymphoma, or brain metastasis.

resultsA total of 215 different PRO measures were identified in 571 published and 194 unpublished studies. The identified PRO measures include brain tumor-specific, cancer-specific, and generic instruments, as well as instruments designed for other indications or multi- or single-item study-specific questionnaires. The most frequently used instruments were the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20 (n = 286 and n = 247), and the FACT-Br (n = 167), however, the majority of the instruments were used only once or twice (150/215).

conclusionMany different PRO measures assessing symptoms, (I)ADL or HRQoL have been used in brain tumor studies to date. Future research should clarify whether these instruments or their scales/items exhibit good content validity and other measurement properties for use in brain tumor patients.

Indexed as

activities of daily livingbrain tumorhealth-related quality of lifepatient-reported outcomesymptoms

Identifiers

PMID34277020
PMCPMC8278354
OpenAlexW3130770249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.