ArticleSurgery today2024
Relationship between changes in pulmonary function and patient-reported outcomes of lung cancer surgery.
Article in Surgery today, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Survival benefit with lobectomy vs. sublobar resection in octogenarians with clinical stage IA lung cancer.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Real-world observation of pain scores using patient-reported outcome measures in lung cancer surgery.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2025Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the relationship between changes in pulmonary function (PF) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of lung cancer surgery.
methodsWe recruited 262 patients who underwent lung resection for lung cancer, to evaluate the PROs, using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ)-C30 and the Lung Cancer 13-question supplement (LC13). The patients underwent PF tests and PRO assessments preoperatively (Pre) and 1 year after surgery (Y1). Changes were calculated by subtracting the value at Pre from the value at Y1. We set two cohorts: patients under the ongoing protocol (Cohort 1) and patients who were eligible for lobectomy with clinical stage I lung cancer (Cohort 2).
resultsCohorts 1 and 2 comprised 206 and 149 patients, respectively. In addition to dyspnea, changes in PF were also correlated with scores for global health status, physical and role function scores, fatigue, nausea and vomiting, pain, and financial difficulties. Absolute correlation coefficient values ranged from 0.149 to 0.311. Improvement of emotional and social function scores was independent of PF. Sublobar resection preserved PF more than lobectomy did. Wedge resection mitigated dyspnea in both cohorts.
conclusionThe correlation between PF and PROs was found to be weak; therefore, further studies are needed to improve the patient's postoperative experience.
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.