ArticleActa oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden)2025
Patient-Reported Outcomes as a Tool for Involvement in Metastatic Melanoma Care.
Article in Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposePatients with metastatic melanoma live longer than a decade ago and have limited contact with the healthcare system. This requires a focus on their ability to manage their health. Patient involvement can contribute to this. The use of Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) may facilitate patient involvement in clinical encounters, especially in the form of enhanced communication between patient and clinician. The purpose of the study was to investigate the association between active use of PRO and patient involvement for patients with metastatic melanoma. Patient/material and methods: This study was based on data from a non-randomized controlled study, in which Danish patients with metastatic melanoma were assigned to either an intervention (PRO actively used as a dialog tool in consultations throughout a year) or control group (standard treatment), based on geographic affiliation. The outcome in the present study was patient involvement, measured with five indicators of patient involvement. Linear regression models were used to estimate the crude and adjusted association between intervention and patient involvement at 3, 6, and 12 months.
resultsA total of 237 patients were included, 114 patients in the intervention group and 123 patients in the control group. Adjusted mean difference between intervention and control group was 1.54 (0.24; 2.83) at 6 months and 1.32 (0.06; 2.59) at 12 months (p < 0.05). Improvement was observed in just one indicator of patient involvement, specifically 'dialog between patient and physician'.
interpretationUsing PRO actively as a dialog tool in consultations can contribute to improved patient involvement for patients with metastatic melanoma.
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.