SynthesisPsycho-oncology2026
Psychometric Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Cancer-Related Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Psycho-oncology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically identify and evaluate the psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for assessing cancer-related cognitive impairment.
methodsThis systematic review was conducted in accordance with COSMIN methodology. Five databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and PsycInfo) were searched from inception to December 31, 2025. Studies reporting the development and/or validation of PROMs for assessing CRCI were eligible for inclusion. Methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist. Psychometric properties were rated using the COSMIN criteria, and the quality of evidence for each instrument was graded using a modified GRADE approach.
resultsA total of 28 studies encompassing 19 PROMs for assessing CRCI were included. Measurement error and responsiveness were each evaluated in one study. The EORTC IADL-BN32 was the only Grade A instrument, although its evidence was restricted to adults with brain tumours. The other 18 instruments received Grade B recommendations, indicating that they have potential for use but require further validation.
conclusionsThe EORTC IADL-BN32 is currently the best-supported instrument for adults with brain tumours, but its applicability to broader CRCI populations remains uncertain and requires further validation. Evidence for interpreting change was particularly limited, since measurement error and responsiveness were each evaluated in only one study, and neither yielded sufficient evidence. Instrument selection should be population- and purpose-specific, and further validation of measurement error, responsiveness and cross-cultural validity is required. Future studies should adhere to COSMIN guidelines to ensure comprehensive evaluation of all psychometric properties during instrument development and validation. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD420251033872).
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.