ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs2025
Best practices and pragmatic approaches for patient-reported outcomes and quality of life measures in cancer clinical trials.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neuroscience in cancer care: ethical, legal, and societal challenges.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Article
- Locked-Window EQ-5D-5L (Index and VAS) Benchmarking in Sarcoma Care: Rule-Based Traffic-Light Classification Across Two Institutions.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- When Survival Improves But Quality of Life Does Not: A Model-Based Meta-Analysis of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Functional Recovery After Chemotherapy- and Radiotherapy-Induced Gastrointestinal Injury: Mechanisms, Clinical Assessment, and Management.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- Clinical outcome assessment trends in neuro-oncology trials.Neuro-oncology practice · 2025Article
- Totality of the Evidence: Optimizing Dosage Selection Strategies in Oncology.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are often collected in cancer clinical trials. Data obtained from trials with PROs are essential in evaluating participant experiences relating to symptoms, financial toxicity, or health-related quality of life. Although most features of clinical trial design, implementation, and analyses apply to trials with PROs, several considerations are unique. In this paper, we focus on specific issues such as selection of the tool, timing and frequency of assessments, and data collection methods. We discuss how the estimand framework can be used in connection with PROs, properties of common estimation methods, and handling of missing outcomes. With a plethora of literature available, we aim to summarize best practices and pragmatic approaches to the design and analysis of the studies incorporating PROs.
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.