Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39703380›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024

Patient-reported Outcome Measures for Peripheral Nerve Injuries: A Systematic Review.

Chloe R Wong, Marta Karpinski, Kristen M Davidge, Anne Klassen, Jana Dengler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. 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. Article
  2. Review
  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

5 authors.

Chloe R WongFrom the Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Marta KarpinskiTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Kristen M DavidgeFrom the Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Anne KlassenDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Jana DenglerFrom the Division of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The goal of managing patients with peripheral nerve injuries is to improve how a patient feels and functions. This goal is best assessed with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which elicit patient concerns, treatment goals, and clinical progression. This study reviews existing PROMs for adult patients with peripheral nerve injuries to assess how comprehensively they measure outcomes important to patients. Methods: A systematic review of Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase (from inception to August 13, 2022) was conducted to identify PROMs developed for adult patients with peripheral nerve injuries. Studies were included if (1) the study population involved traumatic or acquired peripheral nerve injuries; (2) they were randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, or single-arm observational studies; (3) participants were 18 years or older; and (4) PROMs were used to assess quality of life or patient satisfaction. Results: A total of 378 studies were included in this systematic review. We identified 141 unique PROMs used in the adult peripheral nerve injury literature: 20 are disease-specific (14%), 10 are function-specific (7%), 19 are mental health and well-being-specific (13%), 11 are quality of life-specific (8%), 32 are body region-specific (23%), 29 are symptom-specific (21%), 3 are satisfaction-specific (2%), 15 are generic (11%), and 2 are other (1%). Conclusions: There exists considerable heterogeneity of PROMs used in research on patients with peripheral nerve injuries. None of the PROMs comprehensively assess this patient population. The need for the development of a comprehensive PROM for this patient population is highlighted.

Identifiers

PMID39703380
PMCPMC11658760

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.