ArticleJournal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale2022
Development of a patient reported outcome instrument for chronic sialadenitis.
Article in Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of the Chronic Sialadenitis Outcome Test-14 for Chronic Sialadenitis.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Activation of Human FPR2 with AT-RvD1 Resolves Acute Sialadenitis in Vivo.Inflammation · 2025Article
- Calculus at the duct orifice of the submandibular gland in a patient with an edentulous jaw: A case report and literature review.Medicine · 2025Review
- Ultrasound shear wave elastography for patients with sialolithiasis undergoing interventional sialendoscopy.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSialendoscopy assisted treatments are a minimally invasive management modality for chronic sialadenitis. Clinicians report improved patient quality of life (QoL) following sialendoscopy assisted treatments, but there exist gaps in current literature about patient reported outcomes (PROs). PROs are outcome measures developed based on patient perceptions.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to create a PRO instrument for chronic sialadenitis, to assess the efficacy of sialendoscopy assisted treatments in improve patients' QoL.
designThis four-phase qualitative study employed grounded theory methodology and a modified Delphi technique. In Phase I, ten patients were interviewed to identify the QoL domains impacted by chronic sialadenitis. In Phase II, these QoL domains were presented to a focus group of different chronic sialadenitis patients, who were asked to rank them by order of importance. A conceptual framework of QoL domains impacted by chronic sialadenitis was created based on patient consensus. Itemization of the PRO questionnaire was done by a focus group of four Otolaryngologists in phase III. Lastly, the questionnaire was completed in Phase IV by cognitive interviewing of five new chronic sialadenitis patients; ensuring ease of understanding and clarity.
resultsPatients identified 15 domains of QoL impacted by chronic sialadenitis, divided into three sub-scales: physical symptoms, psychosocial symptoms, and activity restriction. These domains provided the basis for creation of a 22-item PRO questionnaire, with a Likert-type response scale.
conclusionClinical application of the novel questionnaire produced by this study will allow for a patient-centered assessment of the patient reported effectiveness of sialendoscopy assisted therapies for management of chronic sialadenitis. Level of evidence Level V.
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.