Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41606262›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2026

Use and reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized controlled trials in non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a scoping review.

Julia Schroer, Paul Jan Bröckelmann, Sam Salek, Tatyana Ionova, Edward Laane, Esther Natalie Oliva, Ina Monsef, Nicole Skoetz, Mario Csenar

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Julia SchroerInstitute of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. julia.schroer@uk-koeln.de.
Paul Jan BröckelmannDepartment I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf (CIO ABCD), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Sam SalekSchool of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Tatyana IonovaQuality of Life Monitoring Unit, Saint Petersburg State University Hospital, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation.
Edward LaaneHematology-Oncology Clinic, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Esther Natalie OlivaHematology Department, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Ina MonsefInstitute of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Nicole SkoetzInstitute of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Mario CsenarInstitute of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNon-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) constitutes a biologically and clinically heterogeneous group of lymphoid malignancies, with varying prognoses and treatment aims between indolent and aggressive subtypes. While survival outcomes remain key efficacy measures, they insufficiently capture the impact of disease and treatment on daily physical and psychosocial functioning, as well as quality of life (QoL).

objectivesTo characterize the use and reporting of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in adult NHL randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including the trajectory of PRO dissemination throughout the trial reporting process.

methodsMEDLINE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP were systematically searched from 1 January 2017 to 19 January 2023 for NHL RCTs irrespective of subtype, with databases being re-searched until 4 February 2025. Cross-sectional and longitudinal descriptive analyses were conducted to investigate PRO use and reporting practices.

findings549 completed and ongoing RCTs met the eligibility criteria, of which 176 trials (32.1%) included a reference to PROs, and 27 (4.9%) used a PRO as a primary outcome. Overall, 95 PRO measures were identified across trials, with EORTC QLQ-C30, FACT-Lymphoma, and EQ-5D being referenced most frequently. Among trials with published results that pre-specified PROs, 25.0% entirely and 10.5% partly omitted PRO findings from their main full-texts, without addressing this shortcoming in subsequent publications.

conclusionPROs are underused and underreported in RCTs in NHL. Standardized PRO evaluation methodology and guidance for the selection of fit-for-purpose PRO measures are needed, along with clear positioning of PROs alongside survival outcomes in clinical trial design and interpretation.

Indexed as

Lymphoma, Non-HodgkinPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHumansQuality of LifeNon-Hodgkin lymphomaPatient-reported experiencePatient-reported outcomesPRO instrumentQuality of lifeSankey diagramScoping review

Identifiers

PMID41606262
PMCPMC12923682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.