ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2026
Assessing content validity of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (FACT-CTCL): a qualitative study.
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 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
backgroundCutaneous T-cell lymphomas (CTCLs) are a heterogeneous group of non-Hodgkin lymphomas characterized by neoplastic T cells in the skin. Common subtypes of CTCL are mycosis fungoides (MF) and Sézary syndrome (SS). Patients with MF/SS can experience significant symptoms that affect health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Although the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma (FACT-CTCL) was developed as a disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for MF/SS, qualitative evaluation of its content validity in the target population has not been assessed. We therefore evaluated the content validity of the FACT-CTCL in patients with MF/SS and clinicians with expertise in MF/SS.
methodsSemi-structured cognitive interviews of patients with a diagnosis of MF or SS, as well as healthcare providers with expertise in treating MF/SS were conducted in alignment with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). Patients evaluated the relevance, comprehensibility, and comprehensiveness of the FACT-CTCL. Clinicians evaluated relevance and comprehensiveness.
resultsTwelve patients (9 MF, 3 SS) and eight clinician experts (3 oncologists, 4 dermatologists, 1 nurse practitioner) participated. The median age of patients was 68 years (range 36-77); six had early-stage (IA - IIA) disease and six had advanced-stage (IIB - IVB) disease. All items were deemed relevant by at least 95% of participants, and 44 of 47 items achieved 100% relevance across patients and clinicians. All items achieved at least 90% comprehensibility among patients, and 39 of 47 scored items were understood by all patients. All patients found the instructions and response options easy to understand, and all participants considered the instrument comprehensive.
conclusionsThe FACT-CTCL demonstrated strong content validity in this sample of patients with MF/SS and expert clinicians. These findings support further evaluation and use of the FACT-CTCL as a disease-specific HRQoL instrument in MF/SS, while additional study in larger and more diverse populations remains 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.