ArticleActa dermato-venereologica2026
Patient Reported Outcomes in Multidisciplinary Care for High-risk Head and Neck Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Article in Acta dermato-venereologica, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multidisciplinary care pathways may improve quality of care, yet little is known about patients' perspectives regarding multidisciplinary treatment for high-risk head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. This study examined health-related quality of life, decisional conflict, and satisfaction with care in 78 high-risk head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma patients undergoing multidisciplinary care. Pre-treatment, patients completed a baseline questionnaire, the EuroQoL-5D-5L, and the Decisional Conflict Scale. One month post-treatment, they completed the EuroQoL-5D-5L, Basal and Squamous Cell Carcinoma Quality of Life, and EORTC IN-PATSAT32 satisfaction questionnaires. Mean generic health-related quality of life scores were 0.76 pre-treatment and 0.81 post-treatment (p = 0.077), with minimal impact on disease-specific health-related quality of life (mean Basal and Squamous Cell Carcinoma Quality of Life scores ranging from 0.46 to 1.05). However, 73.7% of patients expressed worries about prognosis, and 12% of patients reported concerns regarding diagnosis and treatment substantially affecting health-related quality of life. The mean Decisional Conflict Scale total score was 26.61, with 19.2% of patients exceeding the clinically relevant threshold of 37.5, indicating decision delay or uncertainty regarding implementation. Approximately one-third of patients reported a need for better decision-making support. Overall, patients reported high satisfaction with care. In conclusion, while multidisciplinary care had minimal impact on health-related quality of life and resulted in high patient satisfaction, one-third of patients required more comprehensive information and value clarification.
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.