SynthesisBMC cancer2026
Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for health-related quality of life in multiple myeloma: a systematic review based on COSMIN guidelines.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 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
Abstract
purposeTo systematically identify patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), symptoms, and disease burden in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), and to appraise their measurement properties using the COSMIN methodology.
methodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with the COSMIN guideline for reviews of PROMs. Eligible studies reported PROM development, content validation, cross-cultural adaptation, or one or more measurement properties of PROMs used in adult patients with MM. Methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. The results for each measurement property were rated against the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties, and the certainty of evidence was graded using the modified GRADE approach recommended by COSMIN.
resultsTwenty-six studies involving 14 PROMs were included. The EORTC QLQ-MY20 was the most frequently evaluated MM-specific module, followed by MyPOS, HM-PRO, MDASI-MM, FACT-MM, MySIm-Q, and QLICP-MM. Evidence was most often available for internal consistency, structural validity, and hypothesis testing for construct validity. By contrast, formal evidence on measurement error, criterion validity, and cross-cultural validity was seldom reported. No PROM demonstrated uniformly high-quality evidence across all key measurement properties. The EORTC QLQ-MY20 and MyPOS showed the broadest body of supportive evidence and appear to be the most defensible options for MM-specific HRQoL assessment, although additional high-quality content validity and longitudinal measurement studies remain necessary.
conclusionCurrent evidence supports the use of several MM-specific PROMs, particularly the EORTC QLQ-MY20 and MyPOS, but the overall evidence base remains uneven. Future research should prioritize patient-centered content validation, measurement-error evidence, cross-cultural validity, responsiveness, and interpretability to strengthen PROM selection for MM clinical trials and practice.
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.