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.
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.
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.
- 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 · 2026Article
- Carers' interpretation of the recall period and perspective-taking when completing the EQ health and wellbeing instrument (EQ-HWB)-9 as proxies for people with dementia: a think-aloud study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- The association between air pollution exposure and childhood cancer: a scoping review about the challenges in epidemiological studies.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Development, Rasch analysis and validation of the kidney symptom burden questionnaire (KSB-Q).Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
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
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.