Observational studySupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
A comparison of in-the-moment and retrospective patient-reported outcome measures in advanced cancer.
Observational study in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Compliance With Ecological Momentary Assessment Among Patients With Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
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
purposeUnderstanding how to optimally measure symptoms and wellbeing of people with advanced cancer is crucial for supporting patient-centered care. We aimed to (1) compare repeated in-the-moment assessments (experience sampling methods/ESM) and retrospective assessments (traditional patient-reported outcome measures/PROMS) of symptoms and well-being among people with advanced breast or lung cancer; and (2) explore factors associated with discrepancies between these methods.
methodsIn an observational study among people with advanced breast or lung cancer, participants completed up to 60 in-the-moment ESM assessments over 7 days, followed by a 7-day recall (i.e., retrospective) questionnaire covering the same period. We compared in-the-moment and retrospective scores of 16 symptom and wellbeing items visually and through correlations. We examined factors associated with discrepancies using linear regression.
resultsWe analyzed 1676 in-the-moment assessments from 36 participants. Visually, higher in-the-moment scores were associated with higher retrospective scores across the sample. But, participants with identical retrospective scores often had different means (especially when they had higher recalled scores) and fluctuation patterns of in-the-moment scores. Item correlations between in-the-moment and retrospective scores ranged between .24 and .70. The largest discrepancies occurred for pain (Mdiff = -13.2) and tiredness (Mdiff = -12.4). Several parameters of in-the-moment scores and participants' active treatment status were associated with discrepancies.
conclusionIndividuals' retrospective symptom and wellbeing scores positively correlated with their in-the-moment scores over 1 week. Pain and tiredness showed the largest discrepancies. In-the-moment scores revealed considerable variability between individuals and fluctuations over time, which may be relevant to assess depending on the clinical or research objective.
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.