Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37389673›Full record

ReviewSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2023

Assessment tools for patient-reported outcomes in multiple myeloma.

Ting Wang, Qin Lu, LeiWen Tang

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. How First-Line Therapy is Changing in non-Transplant Eligible Multiple Myeloma Patients.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ting WangDepartment of Haematology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, China.
Qin LuDepartment of Haematology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, China.
LeiWen TangDepartment of Nursing, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, China. tanglw@zju.edu.cn.
Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital · CNZhejiang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with multiple myeloma experience severe symptom burden. Patient participation in self-reporting is essential as medical staff's assessment of patient symptom severity is often lower than patient self-reporting. This article reviews patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment tools and their application in the field of multiple myeloma.

resultsThe European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) is the universal patient-reported outcome assessment tool most frequently used to evaluate the life quality in people with multiple myeloma. Among the specific patient-reported outcome assessment tools, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Multiple Myeloma Module (EORTC QLQ-MY20), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM), and the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory-Multiple Myeloma Module (MDASI-MM) are the most widely used, with some scholars using the EORTC QLQ-MY20 as a calibration correlate for scale development. Most current assessment instruments were developed using classical measurement theory methods; future researchers could combine classic theory tests and item response theory to create scientific assessment instruments. In addition, researchers select the appropriate assessment tool based on the purpose of the study. They can translate high-quality assessment tools into different languages and consider applying them more often to assessing multiple myeloma patients. Finally, most existing PROs focus on measuring life quality and symptoms in people with multiple myeloma, with less research on outcomes such as adherence and satisfaction, thus failing to comprehensively evaluate the patient treatment and disease management.

conclusionsResearch has shown that the field of PROs in multiple myeloma is in an exploratory phase. There is still a need to enrich the content of PROs and develop more high-quality PRO scales for multiple myeloma based on the strengths and weaknesses of existing tools. With the successful advancement of information technology, PROs for people with multiple myeloma could be integrated with electronic information systems, allowing patients to report their health status in real time and doctors to track their condition and adjust their treatment, thereby improving patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Multiple MyelomaDisease ManagementHumansPatient Outcome AssessmentPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeAssessment toolsMultiple myelomaNursing carePatient-reported outcomes

Identifiers

PMID37389673
PMCPMC10313577
OpenAlexW4382631473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.