ReviewCureus2022
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Breast Cancer Surgery: Evidence Review and Tool Adaptation.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of life and patient reported outcomes in the UK Mammo-50 randomised trial of annual versus less frequent mammographic surveillance in people with breast cancer aged 50 years and over.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Trial
- Immediate Patient-Related Outcomes in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Novel Axillary Artery Cutaneous BrAnch Perforator (AACAP) Flap Oncoplasty Procedure.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Review
- Explaining risks and benefits of loco-regional treatments to patients.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2023Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes and Experiences Assessment in Women with Breast Cancer: Portuguese Case Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this scoping review was to review survey instruments for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and provide recommendations to construct a tool for PROMs specifically for breast cancer patients who have undergone surgery, to overcome the limitations of existing validated tools. A total of 924 articles were screened. Nine articles were selected based on the eligibility criteria. We found that PROMs' data collection along with advancements in the treatment of breast cancer and the resultant improved clinical outcomes, there is a growing appreciation and focus on improving patients' quality of life (QoL). Previous studies have shown that the assessment of PROMs is linked to a positive effect on patients' symptoms of distress, quality of life, acceptance, and satisfaction. Several PROMs tools have been validated for use in cancer survivors. However, it is unclear whether existing tools are appropriate for use in breast cancer patients who have undergone surgical treatment. Hence, we conducted a scoping review. Following a review of the current PROM related to breast cancer and the necessity to build specialized PROMs related to the outcomes of breast cancer surgery, we provide recommendations for the development of a comprehensive tool to overcome the limitations of existing PROMs tools.
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.