Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38525491›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024

First Phase Development of a Patient-reported Outcome Measure for Midface Oncology.

Amanda E Yung, Jason Luong, Gareth Crouch, Angela M Hong, Arjuna Ananda, Simon Taylor, Ilias Kotronakis, Tsu-Hui Hubert Low, Michael S Elliott, Kate McBride and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 93% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Amanda E YungFrom the Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jason LuongFrom the Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Gareth CrouchFrom the Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Angela M HongFrom the Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Arjuna AnandaDepartment of Ear, Nose and Throat Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Simon TaylorDepartment of Oculoplastic Surgery, Sydney Adventist Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Ilias KotronakisDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW Australia.
Tsu-Hui Hubert LowFrom the Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Michael S ElliottFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kate McBrideInstitute of Academic Surgery at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Claudia RutherfordFaculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Nursing School, Cancer Care Research Unit (CNRU), Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jonathan R ClarkInstitute of Academic Surgery at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Sydney Ch'ngInstitute of Academic Surgery at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital · AUUniversity of Sydney · AUCancer Council NSW · AUChris O’Brien Lifehouse · AUSydney Adventist Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Facial cancer surgery involving the midface (comprising the lower eyelids, nose, cheeks, and upper lip) can have debilitating life-changing functional, social, and psychological impacts on the patient. Midface symptoms are inadequately captured by existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). PROMs are increasingly used for individual patient care, quality improvement, and standardized reporting of treatment outcomes. This study aimed to present our findings from the first phase of the development of a midface, specifically periocular and nasal, PROM. Methods: After international guidance for PROM development, the first phase comprised identification of salient issues and item generation. Fifteen patients who had midface surgery and 10 clinicians from various specialties with more than 5 years' experience treating these patients were recruited. Semi-structured interviews explored aesthetic, functional, social, and psychological outcomes, with specific attention to deficiencies in current PROMs. Thematic analysis was used to develop an item pool, and group interviews with clinicians were carried out to create and refine PROM scales. Results: Qualitative data from patient interviews were grouped into aesthetic, functional, and psychosocial domains for the eyelids and nose. Ninety-nine draft items were generated across these domains. Following focus group discussions, the final version of the midface-specific PROM contained 31 items (13 eye-specific, 10-nose-specific, eight general midface items). Conclusions: This midface-specific PROM is valuable in assessing and comparing patient-reported outcomes in those who have undergone complex resection and reconstruction of the midface. This PROM is currently undergoing field testing.

Identifiers

PMID38525491
PMCPMC10959565
OpenAlexW4393098807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.