ReviewScandinavian journal of caring sciences2026
Impact of Lymphedema on Women's Lives After Gynaecological Cancer: An Integrative Review.
Review in Scandinavian journal of caring sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Lymphedema on Women's Lives After Gynaecological Cancer: An Integrative Review.Scandinavian journal of caring sciences · 2026Review
- Experiences of Living with Gynecological Cancer-Related Lymphedema Among Patients: A Systematic Review and Thematic Synthesis of Qualitative Studies.Patient preference and adherence · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSecondary Lower-Limb Lymphedema (LLL) is a frequent, progressive late effect affecting women after gynaecological cancer treatment, causing swelling due to fluid accumulation in the interstitial spaces in the lower extremities, the lower abdomen, hips and genitals. There is no consensus on how to define and quantify LLL, which makes research on treatment effect difficult. A negative relation between LLL and quality of life has been reported.
aimTo review the literature concerning the identification and impact of LLL on women's lives after gynaecological cancer, including physical, psycho-social and existential aspects.
methodsIn an integrative review, as described by Whittemore & Knafl, data were thematically analysed.
resultsForty-one papers published between 2003 and 2024, encompassing a total of 11,488 participants, were included. The overarching theme was limited knowledge of LLL among healthcare professionals and patients and identification discrepancies. It highlighted a widespread lack of awareness among healthcare professionals and the absence of a standardised approach to LLL assessment. This was further substantiated by the considerable heterogeneity in both diagnostic and measurement methods. Consequently, women received minimal information, experienced delayed diagnoses and had restricted access to treatment. These shortcomings had a negative impact on daily life, affecting physical and psychosocial wellbeing, as well as sexual health. The women reported unmet needs, which led them to adopt proactive approaches and various coping strategies.
conclusionLLL profoundly affects women's quality of life, physical and psychosocial health and existential well-being. Lack of standardised assessment and diagnostic criteria and clear care pathways creates knowledge gaps, delays diagnosis and fragments care, while its 'homeless' status leaves responsibility unclear. Urgent systemic change is needed: research must define evidence-based strategies and policy makers should prioritise multidisciplinary centres and education, with healthcare adopting patient-centred, multidisciplinary practices to ensure timely diagnosis, referral and self-management support.
trial registrationhttps://osf.io/jrh6c.
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.