ArticleResearch and reports in urology2026
Psychometric Validation of the QLQ-NMIBC24 in Low Grade, Intermediate Risk Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.
Article in Research and reports in urology, 2026. 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.
- An interpretable LASSO-Boruta nomogram for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer recurrence after intravesical instillation.Translational andrology and urology · 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
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the EORTC QLQ-NMIBC24 and to propose distribution-based minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds in patients with low-grade, intermediate-risk NMIBC (LG-IR-NMIBC). Patients and Methods: Patients with LG-IR-NMIBC from two phase 3 trials (ATLAS, n = 270; ENVISION, n = 240) completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 (ENVISION only) and QLQ-NMIBC24 questionnaires at baseline, Week 6, and Month 3. Psychometric evaluation of the QLQ-NMIBC24 in the LG-IR-NMIBC population included internal consistency, item convergence, known-groups validity, test-retest reliability and responsiveness to clinical change. Results: Item-item (0.40-0.96) and item-scale correlations (0.44-0.96) indicated good convergent validity across most domains. Internal consistency was acceptable for all multi-item domains (Cronbach's α 0.78-0.93) except Malaise, which showed lower reliability (Cronbach's α 0.34-0.67). Known-groups comparisons supported the instrument's ability to distinguish patients by physical function (effect sizes up to 1.63) and sex-related domains. Test-retest reliability was generally good for Urinary Symptoms and Sexual Function (ICC 0.79-0.82). Selected domains (Urinary Symptoms, Sexual Intimacy, Malaise) demonstrated responsiveness to clinical change. Distribution-based MCID estimates varied across domains (4.37-16.29), providing potential thresholds for meaningful changes in HRQoL scores. Anchor-based analyses using QLQ-C30 change scores were explored, but correlations with QLQ-NMIBC24 domains (r = -0.37 to 0.01) did not meet the minimum threshold (0.37). Conclusion: The QLQ-NMIBC24 demonstrates valid, reliable, and interpretable measurement properties in patients with LG-IR-NMIBC. Although sensitivity varied across domains, the findings support its use in clinical trials and potentially routine practice. Distribution-based MCID thresholds provide guidance for interpreting meaningful HRQoL changes, though further studies using anchor-based methods are warranted.
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.