ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2024
Patient-reported performance status and postoperative complications in elective colorectal cancer surgery.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the concordance between patient-reported performance status (prPS) and surgeon-reported performance status (srPS), and to assess the correlation between srPS and prPS and postoperative complications following elective colorectal cancer surgery. Not all patients are deemed suitable for undergoing a surgical procedure. We aimed to assess whether prPS can aid the surgeons' decision-making prior to surgery.
methodsIn this retrospective study, 524 patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery were included. prPS were collected via questionnaires, while 30-day postoperative complications were obtained from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG) database. To evaluate the agreement between prPS and srPS, linearly weighted kappa statistics were applied. Rank-biserial correlation analysis was used to calculate the correlation between prPS and srPS with postoperative complications.
resultsIn total, there was an approximate 71% concordance between the assessments. Around 17% of the patients rated themselves with a higher PS status than the surgeons, while 13% of the patients rated themselves with a lower PS. Overall postoperative complications, minor surgical complications, and medical complications were all significantly correlated to both srPS and prPS, while only srPS was correlated with major surgical complications. Neither srPS nor prPS were correlated with overall surgical complications (major and minor collapsed).
conclusionThe agreement between prPS and srPS is poor and in nearly one-third of the cases, disagreement occurs. Overall, both prPS and srPS were correlated to postoperative complications, with srPS demonstrated a slightly higher correlation.
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.