ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Assessment of quality of life in cancer patients using anchoring vignettes: comparisons between mixed cancer patients, patients receiving palliative care, and the general population.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Integration of early palliative care in cancer treatment: a meta-analysis of 39 randomized controlled trials on clinical outcomes and management optimization.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction Without Acellular Dermal Matrix and Mesh: A Call for Comparative Evidence.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Response shift as a common mechanism linking quality of life gains and reduced aggressive care in early palliative care trials.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Review
- Palliative care among cancer patients in Georgia: System-level gaps identified through health-related quality of life discrepancies.Journal of public health research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Quality of life (QoL) has become a relevant outcome criterion in oncology in general and in palliative care in particular. The aims of this study were to compare the QoL of cancer patients receiving palliative care with groups of mixed cancer patients and with the general population, and to test whether response shift effects influence the assessment of QoL. Methods: This study included data from several cross-sectional investigations: one sample of 152 cancer patients receiving palliative care, two samples of patients with mixed cancer diagnoses ( Results: QoL was highest in the general population (EORTC QLQ-C30 mean sum score Conclusion: The results show in which specific dimensions advanced cancer patients report strong detriments in QoL. The different assessments of the vignettes indicate a response shift effect so that the cancer patients have changed their frames of reference for assessing QoL in such a way that they indicate less severe restrictions. This means that the reductions in QoL in cancer patients, as measured with standard questionnaires, tend to underestimate the true detriments.
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.