Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36270157›Full record

ArticleSurgical oncology2022

Examining patient perspectives on sarcoma surveillance: The Sarcoma Surveillance Survey.

Sarah C Tepper, Anna K Holten, Donna B Jeffe, Patrick H England, Zachery L Hong, Maria Pérez, Michelle Ghert, Angela C Hirbe, Cara A Cipriano

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Sarah C TepperMidwest Orthopaedics at Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA. Electronic address: sarah_c_tepper@rush.edu.
Anna K HoltenDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Donna B JeffeDepartment of Medicine, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Patrick H EnglandDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Zachery L HongDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Maria PérezDepartment of Medicine, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Michelle GhertMcMaster University and Hamilton Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Angela C HirbeDivision of Oncology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, USA; Siteman Cancer Center, Barnes Jewish Hospital, and Washington University School of Medicine, USA.
Cara A CiprianoDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Washington University in St. Louis · USHamilton Health Sciences · CAJewish Hospital · USRush University Medical Center · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

WU INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCESUL1TR002345 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI William G. Powderly · 2017 to 2026
$97.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002345
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe optimal frequency and modality of sarcoma surveillance imaging are uncertain, and current practices vary substantially. While efforts to develop evidence-based guidelines are ongoing, patient perspectives regarding surveillance imaging have not been reported. The primary goal of this study was to pilot the novel Sarcoma Surveillance Survey to assess patient concerns regarding sarcoma surveillance.

methodsIn this single-center, cross-sectional study, patients receiving surveillance imaging after surgical sarcoma treatment were administered the 10-item Sarcoma Surveillance Survey, the validated Appraisal Scale, measuring positive and negative emotional reactions to imaging, and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Anxiety Short Form 8a as a measure of anxiety.

resultsPatients expressed highest levels of concern about cost and radiation exposure associated with surveillance, and most (87.6%) did not express a preference for more or less frequent imaging. Younger patients and those living further away from the imaging center were more concerned about cost of surveillance. Female patients had higher levels of concern compared to males regarding radiation, IV contrast, and overall levels of concern about surveillance. Higher levels of anxiety were correlated with preference for more frequent imaging (r

conclusionsPatient perspectives should be considered when developing sarcoma surveillance strategies. Identifying patients with greater anxiety and concerns regarding imaging may create opportunities for improved surveillance practices as well as counseling and survivorship interventions.

Indexed as

SarcomaSoft Tissue NeoplasmsAnxietyCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesCancerOncologyPROMISSarcomaSurveillanceSurveySurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID36270157
PMCPMC9729379
OpenAlexW4301368909

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.