SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used among liver transplant recipients: a systematic review and methodological quality appraisal.
Synthesis 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
aimTo identify instruments used to measure patient-reported outcomes after LT, and critically evaluate their measurement properties.
methodsFive online databases were searched to find English-language LT-specific PROMs from their inception to October 2024. Studies describing the development or validation of PROMs were included. Two reviewers extracted and synthesized information about the characteristics of the studies and instruments. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instrument (COSMIN). Two reviewers independently evaluated the methodological quality of the included instruments.
resultsA total of 17 studies involving 14 PROMs met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The included PROMs assessed a range of outcomes, including health-related quality of life, therapeutic adherence, symptom experience, social participation, feeling for the donor, satisfaction and informational needs. None of the 14 scales reported the ten boxes of measurement properties outlined by the COSMIN. Among all the measurement properties, content validity from expert (64.3%, 9/14) and internal consistency (57.1%, 8/14) were the two most frequently measured attributes. Less than half of the studies evaluated the content validity from the patients' perspective. Four studies evaluated structural validity using exploratory factor analysis, but no study conducted confirmatory factor analysis or used IRT method to measure the structural validity.
conclusionThis systematic review provided an overall picture and detailed analysis of LT-specific PROMs, and highlighted the paucity of well-developed and validated instruments. Further studies are urgently needed, both in terms of exploring patients' health concerns after LT and validating the instruments. REPORTING
methodThis study is reported according to the PRISMA Statement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39831937What 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.