Observational studyBMJ open2025
Measuring health-related quality of life of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer using the Jordanian EQ-5D-3L value set: a cross-sectional observational study.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Where healthcare systems fall short in long-term ostomy care: implications for quality of life, healthcare utilization, and sustainable care pathways.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Review
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
objectiveHealth-related quality of life (HRQoL) of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Jordan has been previously evaluated using disease-specific HRQoL tools. Meanwhile, data on HRQoL utility scores for calculating Quality-Adjusted Life Years for economic evaluations are lacking. In this study, we aim to describe, measure and identify predictors of HRQoL utility scores in patients with mCRC.
designThis was a cross-sectional, non-interventional, observational study.
settingA specialised cancer centre in Jordan.
participantsA cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted on 164 mCRC adult patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Using the five-level EuroQol-3-dimension (EQ-5D-3L) instrument, patients' health profiles were described and then valued using the EQ-5D-3L value set for Jordan to generate a single utility score. The Kruskal-Wallis test assessed differences in mean utility scores across patient characteristic categories. A Tobit regression model was used to identify potential predictors of HRQoL in mCRC patients.
resultsA total of 164 patients were enrolled with a mean age of 59 years, a mean utility score of 0.78 (SD±0.25) and visual analogue scale score of 68.78 (SD: ±19.9). 19% of patients had a stoma, and most of the patients reported health problems (72%); pain and discomfort were reported by (55%), followed by mobility (32%), usual activities (29%), anxiety/depression and self-care (13%). Analysis revealed that patients with more than one metastatic site, those who received more than one line of systemic treatment, were currently on chemotherapy, received systemic therapy in the last year or had peritoneal metastasis were found to have significantly lower utility scores (p<0.05). In contrast, patients who were employed at the time of the interview had significantly higher utility scores (p<0.05). A multivariate Tobit regression model showed that the number of metastatic sites and number of systemic treatment lines were significant predictors of lower utility scores (p<0.05). Conversely, being employed was a significant predictor of higher utility scores (p<0.05).
conclusionUtility scores measured in this study could be valuable for future economic evaluations of mCRC treatments. Pain and discomfort were the most reported problems among patients, highlighting the need for further evaluation to improve pain management strategies. Additionally, our regression analysis identified significant predictors of HRQoL.
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.