ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2026
Electronic patient-reported outcome assessment at inpatient admission: a descriptive analysis of real-world data for 1423 radiotherapy patients.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PRO) capture patients' self-reported and treatment-related experiences, including functional impairment, symptoms, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Although PRO have shown benefits in many studies and are recommended by guidelines, systematic PRO assessment is still rarely integrated into routine cancer care. This paper describes results of the long-term implementation of electronic PRO assessment (ePRO) in the routine workflow of a radiation oncology inpatient clinic by analyzing patients' HRQOL at admission.
methodsAdmission ePRO included the EORTC QLQ-C30. PRO data were analyzed descriptively and stratified by sex, age, and primary tumor diagnosis.
resultsThe sample included 1,423 patients. More than half reported clinically important burden in physical and emotional functioning and fatigue. Male patients tended to report better functioning and lower symptom burden. Older patients reported greater burden in physical functioning, appetite loss, and constipation but less burden in social functioning and financial problems. Global health status showed little to no differences by sex, age, or tumor diagnosis.
conclusionsThe analyses showed substantial self-reported functional impairment and symptom burden at admission in inpatient radiation oncology and highlight the value of ePRO for identifying needs early, when patients' clinical status is not yet well known to the care team. At the organizational level, these results can help set priorities for supportive care during hospitalization and support more efficient resource allocation.
trial registrationNot applicable, the analysis used only PRO data collected as part of routine care in the inpatient radiation oncology clinic (see also the declaration of no objection).
Indexed as
Identifiers
42920174What 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.