ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Effects of evidence-based nursing under a quantitative assessment strategy on cancer-related fatigue, self-management ability, and quality of life in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Serum USP1 and PD-L1 levels independently predict treatment response and prognosis in cervical cancer: a retrospective cohort study.American journal of cancer 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the effects of evidence-based nursing under a quantitative assessment strategy (EB-NQAS) on cancer-related fatigue (CRF), self-management ability, quality of life (QoL), and adverse events in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Methods: A single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted, enrolling 150 lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy between January 2024 and January 2025. Participants were randomized into the intervention group (n=75) and control group (n=75) using a random number table. The intervention group received EB-NQAS, which featured personalized care plans based on symptom quantification via the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), while the control group received routine nursing care. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and 3 months. CRF was assessed using the Piper Fatigue Scale (PFS), self-management ability via the Adult Health Self-Management Scale (AHSMSRS), and QoL via the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (EORTC-QLQ-C30). Adverse events were recorded. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models and chi-square tests. Results: Analyses were conducted on all 150 randomized participants per the intention-to-treat principle. After 3 months, the EB-NQAS group showed a significantly greater reduction in the total PFS score compared to the control group (22.88 ± 1.72 vs. 25.36 ± 1.63; group × time interaction, P<0.001). The intervention group also demonstrated significantly greater improvements in total AHSMSRS scores (146.00 ± 9.77 vs. 128.45 ± 12.45) and global health status/QoL scores (77.66 ± 9.74 vs. 68.91 ± 9.51) than the control group (all group × time interactions, P<0.001). The incidence of gastrointestinal reactions in the intervention group (5.33%) was lower than that in the control group (18.67%, P = 0.012). No significant differences were observed in other adverse events (P>0.05). Conclusion: Evidence-based nursing under a quantitative assessment strategy effectively reduces CRF, improves self-management ability and QoL, and decreases gastrointestinal reactions in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, demonstrating strong potential for clinical application.
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.