Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39630392›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025

Recalling what we thought we knew about recall periods: a qualitative descriptive study of how adults diagnosed with cancer use recall periods for patient-reported outcome items about physical function.

Theresa Coles, Kate Plyler, Alexy Hernandez, Rebecca Fillipo, Debra M Henke, Cara Arizmendi, C Rory Goodwin, Thomas W LeBlanc, Sandhya Lagoo-Deenadayalan, Bryce B Reeve and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. What patients would have liked to have known in advance about physical function due to cancer treatment.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

11 authors.

Theresa ColesCenter for Health Measurement, Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC, 27701, USA. Theresa.Coles@Duke.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2941-8999
Kate PlylerCenter for Health Measurement, Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
Alexy HernandezCenter for Health Measurement, Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
Rebecca FillipoCenter for Health Measurement, Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
Debra M HenkeCenter for Health Measurement, Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
Cara ArizmendiCenter for Health Measurement, Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
C Rory GoodwinDepartment of Neurosurgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Thomas W LeBlancDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapy, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Sandhya Lagoo-DeenadayalanDepartment of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Bryce B ReeveCenter for Health Measurement, Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
Kevin P WeinfurtCenter for Health Measurement, Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.

Funding

U.S. Food and Drug Administration 75F40120C00069
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn cancer studies, assessment of patients' physical function can provide insight into cancer-related symptoms and the side effects of treatment. Physical function can be assessed using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which may or may not include a recall period-the amount of time the questionnaire asks the respondent to think back to answer the questions. More understanding is needed about how patients interpret and respond to items posed with different recall periods, and which recall period they actually use. STUDY DESIGN AND

settingWe conducted a qualitative study with 72 adults diagnosed with cancer to describe response processes when answering PROM items about physical function.

resultsWhen describing their physical function during concept elicitation interviews, most participants recalled their functioning over 1 month or more. When presented with PROM items with no recall period, the most used period was more than 4 weeks. When presented with a 7-day recall, the most used period was 7 days. However, almost 30% of responses used recall periods greater than 1 week.

conclusionIncluding a 7-day recall period improves recall consistency for patients when answering physical function PROM items, but there is still room for improvement. The inaccuracy of recall for PROMs in clinical trials influences the ability to calculate the change in treatment outcomes over time and may conceal or emphasize actual treatment effects.

Indexed as

Mental RecallNeoplasmsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsCancerPatient-reported outcome measuresPhysical functionQualitative researchQuestionnaireRecall period

Identifiers

PMID39630392
PMCPMC11919987

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.