Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39259455›Full record

SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2024

Twenty-five years of experience with patient-reported outcome measures in soft-tissue sarcoma patients: a systematic review.

Jasmijn D Generaal, Marnix R Jansen, Goudje L van Leeuwen, Robert J van Ginkel, Lukas B Been, Barbara L van Leeuwen

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Jasmijn D GeneraalDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands. j.d.generaal@umcg.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3974-9812
Marnix R JansenDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Goudje L van LeeuwenDivision of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Robert J van GinkelDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Lukas B BeenDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Barbara L van LeeuwenDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 GZ, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAs the importance of the patient's perspective on treatment outcome is becoming increasingly clear, the availability of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has grown accordingly. There remains insufficient information regarding the quality of PROMs in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs). The objectives of this systematic review were (1) to identify all PROMs used in STS patients and (2) to critically appraise the methodological quality of these PROMs.

methodsLiterature searches were performed in MEDLINE and Embase on April 22, 2024. PROMs were identified by including all studies that evaluate (an aspect of) health-related quality of life in STS patients by using a PROM. Second, studies that assessed measurement properties of the PROMs utilized in STS patients were included. Quality of PROMs was evaluated by performing a COSMIN analysis.

resultsIn 59 studies, 39 PROMs were identified, with the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) being the most frequently utilized. Three studies evaluated methodological quality of PROMs in the STS population. Measurement properties of the TESS, Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) and European Organization for Research and Treatment for Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30) were reported. None of the PROMs utilized in the STS population can be recommended for use based on the current evidence and COSMIN analysis.

conclusionTo ensure collection of reliable outcomes, PROMs require methodological evaluation prior to utilization in the STS population. Research should prioritize on determining relevant content and subsequently selecting the most suitable PROM for assessment.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeSarcomaHumansPsychometricsSurveys and QuestionnairesConsensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement InstrumentsCOSMINPatient-reported outcomePatient-reported outcome measureReviewSoft-tissue sarcoma

Identifiers

PMID39259455
PMCPMC11599342

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.