ReviewAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2026
Best evidence for managing cutaneous immune-related adverse events in cancer: A summary from Chinese and English literature.
Review in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objective: This study aims to summarize the best evidence for cutaneous immune-related adverse events (cirAEs) nursing in cancer patients, which provides theoretical support for standardizing the preventive, assessment, grading, nursing interventions, and follow-up of various cirAEs. Methods: Guided by the 6S evidence hierarchy, a comprehensive search was conducted in Chinese and English databases including UpToDate, BMJ Best Practice, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, SinoMed, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases, as well as 19 guideline or academic websites, retrieving evidence from the database's inception to November 5th, 2025. Two reviewers independently screened and appraised eligible publications, including guidelines, evidence summaries, clinical decisions, expert consensuses, and systematic reviews. Results: A total of 24 Chinese and English articles were included, comprising 7 guidelines, 3 systematic reviews, 9 expert consensuses, 2 clinical decisions, and 3 evidence summaries. We identified 25 best-evidence recommendations across five key dimensions: prevention, assessment, grading, nursing interventions, health education, and follow-up. Following expert evaluation based on the FAME framework, 17 recommendations were graded as strong and 8 as weak. Conclusions: This study consolidates evidence-based recommendations from Chinese and English literature for cirAEs nursing management. Clinical implementation should integrate patient preferences, contextual factors, and potential barriers to evidence application. Ongoing assessment of emerging research is warranted. Systematic review registration: This study was registered at the Fudan University Centre for Evidence-based Nursing (Registration No. ES20259226).
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.