ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2024
Patient-reported outcomes following esophagectomy.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of reflux symptoms after esophagectomy: patient-reported outcomes and management.BMC geriatrics · 2026Pooled it
- The impact of perioperative outcomes on long-term survival after esophageal cancer resection.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- A Journey Mapping Study on the Full-Course Management of Elderly Patients Undergoing Radical Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive or open esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a comprehensive systematic review of surgical and survival outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The impact on quality of life (QoL) following esophagectomy is well reported in many studies that have analyzed patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The morbidity surrounding esophagectomy mainly lies within the significant lifestyle changes that can be permanent in some patients. Research efforts in cancer treatments primarily focus on measurements of survival and major morbidity to establish the best therapy that provides the longest survival, but they do not consider the global well-being of the patient. PROs assist in this measurement of QoL and health that is obtained from the patient or caregiver. These instruments are of minimal burden and cost to the patient and are generally utilized before each clinic visit which can help quantify symptoms and improve communication between patients and their surgeons. PROs can also be successfully integrated into the electronic medical records for a standardized approach to collection of data. Review of PRO studies have demonstrated a consensus of an overall decrease in QoL immediately following esophagectomy, but there is a discordance in long-term analyses regarding health-related QoL (HRQoL) scores that return to baseline. This review focuses on methods of gathering and utilizing PRO data, as well as reviewing the current literature regarding QoL research in those undergoing esophagectomy for both short-term and long-term periods.
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.