ArticleScientific reports2024
The lymphedema patient experience within the healthcare system: a cross-sectional epidemiologic assessment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Interventions to improve the psychosocial outcomes of individuals with lymphedema: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of contemporary randomized controlled trials for treatment of lower extremity lymphedema by intermittent pneumatic compression devices.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Gatekeeper or Pathfinder? The Evolving Role of Lymphedema Surgeons in the Assessment of Limb Swelling.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Mechanisms and treatments of lymphedema.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Advancing Lymphedema Surveillance With Evidence-Based Practices.Clinical journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lymphedema is a progressive lymphatic disease that potentiates physical and psychosocial distress. Despite its impact, patients reportedly encounter lymphatic ignorance throughout the healthcare system. This cross-sectional study aims to summarize clinical characteristics and interactions of lymphedema patients within the healthcare system. Two lymphedema patient cohorts were included: The Global Registry Analysis Cohort included lymphedema patients who contributed to an international digital lymphatic registry and the Interactions Cohort included patients who initiated a questionnaire about interactions with the medical system. The global registry was used to obtain demographic and clinical characteristics from affiliated lymphedema patients. A 23-item online questionnaire on healthcare experiences and satisfaction with lymphatic healthcare was then distributed to the Interactions Cohort. Complete responses were obtained from 2474 participants. Participants were a mean age of 57.5 ± 16.1 years and 51.4% had a cancer history. Participants reported substantial delays in diagnosis and treatment. Cancer-related and non-cancer-related lymphedema patients reported similar levels of perceived physician disinterest in their lymphedema; however, non-cancer-related lymphedema patients reported more care dissatisfaction. Ultimately, patients continue to face delays in lymphedema diagnosis and treatment. We developed an evidence-based model highlighting areas of reform needed to improve lymphatic education and healthcare.
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.