ReviewBreast cancer (Dove Medical Press)2025
Quality of Life in Breast Cancer Patients in Saudi Arabia: A Systematic Review.
Review in Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceived Stress and Sociodemographic Factors Among Saudi Women with Breast Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Influence of age, body mass index and family income on the health Quality of Life among the breast cancer patients in Bangladesh: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Sexual Satisfaction and Psychosocial Well-Being Among Saudi Survivors of Cervical and Breast Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Breast cancer is the most prevalent malignancy worldwide which carries a high mortality rate. Quality of life (QoL) is adversely affected by the disease process; thus, this systematic review aimed to Summarize the QoL among women with breast cancer in Saudi Arabia, and descriptively analyze the risk factors that are associated with low QoL. Methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines for systematic review, a literature search for all cross-sectional studies conducted in Saudi Arabia was performed in five databases including PubMed, DOAJ, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Mendeley, then, the studies which met the eligibility criteria were extracted and assessed for quality using AXIS tool. Results: Following a full-text evaluation, there were a total of 8 included articles. Based on the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, the Global Health Status (GHS) score of patients with breast cancer ranged from 31.2 +20 to 73.16 ± 20.26. Elements that impact Health Related Quality of Life (HRQol) are the age of breast cancer diagnosis, marital status, and number of children. Women who are childless, widowed, or divorced have a lower quality of life (QoL), and those who were diagnosed beyond the age of 50 have worse emotional functioning. Emotional well-being is lowered by the coexisting medical issues especially if living alone. Chemotherapy and monoclonal antibodies can make the patients stressed and more tired. Rehabilitation groups surprisingly can increase insomnia, while immunotherapy and radiation therapy may decrease physical function, particularly in older patients. Conclusion: This systematic review has identified several factors that affect the quality of life of breast cancer patients in Saudi Arabia, including physical, mental, functional, and social well-being, as well as various sociodemographic factors. Understanding these factors and implementing a QoL assessment tool in clinical practice can aid in the development of supportive measurements for those patients and their families, helping them to manage their life challenges more effectively.
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.