ArticleBMC nephrology2025
Development and validation of the renal cancer scale among the system of quality of life instruments for cancer patients QLICP-RE (V2.0): a multicenter longitudinal study.
Article in BMC nephrology, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe importance of quality of life (QoL) in cancer care has gained increasing recognition, but no scale for renal cancer was developed based on the modular approach. This paper is aimed to develop and validate a renal cancer-specific assessment tool, QLICP-RE (V2.0), to provide a scientific basis for evaluating the QoL of kidney cancer patients and informing relevant policy development.
methodsThe QLICP-RE (V2.0) was developed based on procedural decision-making methods and combining the general module and the specific module. Based on the data from 179 admitted and discharged renal cancer patients, the psychometric properties of the scale were evaluated. Reliability of the QLICP-RE (V2.0) was evaluated using Cronbach’s α and Test-retest reliability correlation. The construct validity and criteria-related validity was assessed through correlation analysis and structural equation modeling. The responsiveness was evaluated by comparing the differences in scores of the scale before and after treatment using paired t-tests, and computing the Standard Response Mean (SRM).
resultsThe QLICP-RE(V2.0) was developed with a 32 items general module and a 11 items specific module. Regarding the Cronbach’s α coefficients for each domain of the QLICP-RE (V2.0), all domains showed satisfactory reliability (α ≥ 0.7), except for the social functioning domain (α = 0.34). The test-retest reliability coefficients demonstrated good stability, with values exceeding 0.80 for all domains except the social functioning domain (r = 0.50). The correlation analysis and structural equation modeling confirmed good construct validity and criterion-related validity. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) for all domains exception of psychological function and common symptoms and side effects, and also specific module and the total scale before and after treatments, with standardized response mean (SRM) values ranged from − 2.54 to 0.23.
conclusionQLICP-RE(V2.0) has good validity, reliability and moderate responsiveness. In the future, more patients should be enrolled and the sample size should be expanded to continuously optimize the scale and evaluate the quality of life of patients with renal cancer more scientifically.
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.