Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39529915›Full record

ReviewDigital health

Electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROs) as tools for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in women with gynecologic and breast cancers: a systematic review.

Amal Boutib, Asmaa Azizi, Ibtissam Youlyouz-Marfak, Malak Kouiti, Mohamed Taiebine, Mohamed Benfatah, Chakib Nejjari, Salim Bounou, Abdelghafour Marfak

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors.

Amal BoutibLaboratory of Health Sciences and Technologies, Higher Institute of Health Sciences, Hassan First University of Settat, Settat, Morocco.
Asmaa AziziLaboratory of Health Sciences and Technologies, Higher Institute of Health Sciences, Hassan First University of Settat, Settat, Morocco.
Ibtissam Youlyouz-MarfakLaboratory of Health Sciences and Technologies, Higher Institute of Health Sciences, Hassan First University of Settat, Settat, Morocco.
Malak KouitiLaboratory of Health Sciences and Technologies, Higher Institute of Health Sciences, Hassan First University of Settat, Settat, Morocco.
Mohamed TaiebineEuro-Mediterranean University of Fez, Fez 51, Morocco.
Mohamed BenfatahLaboratory of Health Sciences and Technologies, Higher Institute of Health Sciences, Hassan First University of Settat, Settat, Morocco.
Chakib NejjariEuro-Mediterranean University of Fez, Fez 51, Morocco.
Salim BounouEuro-Mediterranean University of Fez, Fez 51, Morocco.
Abdelghafour MarfakEuro-Mediterranean University of Fez, Fez 51, Morocco.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4212-8438

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To provide a comprehensive review of the use of electronic patient-reported outcomes measures (ePROs) as digital health tools to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in women with breast, ovarian, cervical, and endometrial cancers. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify studies that used ePROs to evaluate HRQoL in women diagnosed with breast and gynecological cancers. The review followed the 2020 update of the PRISMA guidelines and a pre-registered protocol in PROSPERO (CRD42024516737). Inclusion criteria encompassed studies focusing on ePROs for HRQoL assessment in the specified cancers, without language restrictions, and published between January 2000 and December 2023. Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts to identify eligible studies. Results: The search yielded 4978 articles. After removing duplicates, 900 articles were assessed for eligibility by screening the titles and abstracts. After screening the full text of 168 articles, a total of 16 studies were included in this systematic review. These studies were mainly conducted in Europe and the Americas and included different study designs such as randomized controlled trials (four articles), prospective studies (seven articles), and feasibility and validation studies (five articles). The majority of the studies focused on breast cancer (87.5%), with fewer studies addressing ovarian and cervical cancers. A variety of ePRO tools were used, including the FACT and EORTC QLQ. Findings show that ePROs enhance therapeutic management, treatment adherence, and HRQoL through improved symptom monitoring and communication between patients and providers. Conclusion: The integration of ePROs in oncology care facilitates a patient-centered approach, enhances communication between patients and healthcare providers, and supports personalized treatment strategies. These findings underscore the importance of incorporating ePROs into routine cancer care to improve overall patient outcomes and HRQoL.

Indexed as

breast cancerePROsgynecological cancer.HRQoLpatient-reported outcomes

Identifiers

PMID39529915
PMCPMC11552042

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.