Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Patient-reported outcome measures for use in gy...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Patient-reported outcome measures for use in gynaecological oncology: a systematic review

Research output: Contribution to journalLiterature reviewpeer-review

Published

Standard

Patient-reported outcome measures for use in gynaecological oncology : a systematic review. / Preston, Nancy J.; Wilson, Nadine; Wood, N. J.; Brine, Jenny; Ferreira Arcuri, Juliano; Brearley, Sarah G.

In: BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 122, No. 5, 04.2015, p. 615-622.

Research output: Contribution to journalLiterature reviewpeer-review

Harvard

Preston, NJ, Wilson, N, Wood, NJ, Brine, J, Ferreira Arcuri, J & Brearley, SG 2015, 'Patient-reported outcome measures for use in gynaecological oncology: a systematic review', BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, vol. 122, no. 5, pp. 615-622. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.13251

APA

Vancouver

Author

Preston, Nancy J. ; Wilson, Nadine ; Wood, N. J. ; Brine, Jenny ; Ferreira Arcuri, Juliano ; Brearley, Sarah G. / Patient-reported outcome measures for use in gynaecological oncology : a systematic review. In: BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2015 ; Vol. 122, No. 5. pp. 615-622.

Bibtex

@article{1973a3f4459e4f03940bc92730bdae19,
title = "Patient-reported outcome measures for use in gynaecological oncology: a systematic review",
abstract = "BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to assess the impact of health care on a patient's health. Within the gynaecological oncology setting, multiple PROMs have been adopted but no assessment has been made in terms of their psychometric qualities and robustness.ObjectivesTo undertake a systematic review to identify the most psychometrically robust and appropriate PROM used in the gynaecological oncology setting.Search strategyA search of the bibliographic database of the Oxford PROM group, plus nine additional databases, was carried out along with citation-tracking and hand searches.Selection criteriaStudies examining the psychometric properties of outcome measures tested in gynaecological cancer populations were selected by three blinded reviewers.Data collection and analysisStudies were independently assessed and data extracted. Analysis included an appraisal of the psychometric properties and functionality of the included PROMs to guide recommendations.Main resultsEighteen PROMs tested in gynaecological oncology settings were identified. These were categorised into seven areas of focus, and the most psychometrically robust tools were identified: (1) generic (no recommendation); (2) general cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G); (3) pelvic cancer (QUESTGY); (4) ovarian cancer (EORTC QLQ-OV28); (5) cervical cancer (EORTC QLQ-CX24); (6) endometrial cancer (EORTC QLQ-EN 24); and (7) vulval cancer (FACT-V).Author's conclusionsSeven PROMs were recommended for use in six gynaecological populations. No single tool was identified that had been tested in all disease groups. Some showed promise, but a lack of conceptual clarity about the core outcomes and the rationale for use will require further testing using well-constructed studies.",
keywords = "Cancer, gynaecological oncology, metrics, outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures, psychometric properties, QUALITY-OF-LIFE, CERVICAL-CANCER, OVARIAN-CANCER, CLINICAL-PRACTICE, PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES, EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION, FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT, CHINESE VERSION, EORTC QLQ-CX24, QUESTIONNAIRE",
author = "Preston, {Nancy J.} and Nadine Wilson and Wood, {N. J.} and Jenny Brine and {Ferreira Arcuri}, Juliano and Brearley, {Sarah G.}",
year = "2015",
month = apr,
doi = "10.1111/1471-0528.13251",
language = "English",
volume = "122",
pages = "615--622",
journal = "BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology",
issn = "1470-0328",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Patient-reported outcome measures for use in gynaecological oncology

T2 - a systematic review

AU - Preston, Nancy J.

AU - Wilson, Nadine

AU - Wood, N. J.

AU - Brine, Jenny

AU - Ferreira Arcuri, Juliano

AU - Brearley, Sarah G.

PY - 2015/4

Y1 - 2015/4

N2 - BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to assess the impact of health care on a patient's health. Within the gynaecological oncology setting, multiple PROMs have been adopted but no assessment has been made in terms of their psychometric qualities and robustness.ObjectivesTo undertake a systematic review to identify the most psychometrically robust and appropriate PROM used in the gynaecological oncology setting.Search strategyA search of the bibliographic database of the Oxford PROM group, plus nine additional databases, was carried out along with citation-tracking and hand searches.Selection criteriaStudies examining the psychometric properties of outcome measures tested in gynaecological cancer populations were selected by three blinded reviewers.Data collection and analysisStudies were independently assessed and data extracted. Analysis included an appraisal of the psychometric properties and functionality of the included PROMs to guide recommendations.Main resultsEighteen PROMs tested in gynaecological oncology settings were identified. These were categorised into seven areas of focus, and the most psychometrically robust tools were identified: (1) generic (no recommendation); (2) general cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G); (3) pelvic cancer (QUESTGY); (4) ovarian cancer (EORTC QLQ-OV28); (5) cervical cancer (EORTC QLQ-CX24); (6) endometrial cancer (EORTC QLQ-EN 24); and (7) vulval cancer (FACT-V).Author's conclusionsSeven PROMs were recommended for use in six gynaecological populations. No single tool was identified that had been tested in all disease groups. Some showed promise, but a lack of conceptual clarity about the core outcomes and the rationale for use will require further testing using well-constructed studies.

AB - BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to assess the impact of health care on a patient's health. Within the gynaecological oncology setting, multiple PROMs have been adopted but no assessment has been made in terms of their psychometric qualities and robustness.ObjectivesTo undertake a systematic review to identify the most psychometrically robust and appropriate PROM used in the gynaecological oncology setting.Search strategyA search of the bibliographic database of the Oxford PROM group, plus nine additional databases, was carried out along with citation-tracking and hand searches.Selection criteriaStudies examining the psychometric properties of outcome measures tested in gynaecological cancer populations were selected by three blinded reviewers.Data collection and analysisStudies were independently assessed and data extracted. Analysis included an appraisal of the psychometric properties and functionality of the included PROMs to guide recommendations.Main resultsEighteen PROMs tested in gynaecological oncology settings were identified. These were categorised into seven areas of focus, and the most psychometrically robust tools were identified: (1) generic (no recommendation); (2) general cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G); (3) pelvic cancer (QUESTGY); (4) ovarian cancer (EORTC QLQ-OV28); (5) cervical cancer (EORTC QLQ-CX24); (6) endometrial cancer (EORTC QLQ-EN 24); and (7) vulval cancer (FACT-V).Author's conclusionsSeven PROMs were recommended for use in six gynaecological populations. No single tool was identified that had been tested in all disease groups. Some showed promise, but a lack of conceptual clarity about the core outcomes and the rationale for use will require further testing using well-constructed studies.

KW - Cancer

KW - gynaecological oncology

KW - metrics

KW - outcomes

KW - patient-reported outcome measures

KW - psychometric properties

KW - QUALITY-OF-LIFE

KW - CERVICAL-CANCER

KW - OVARIAN-CANCER

KW - CLINICAL-PRACTICE

KW - PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES

KW - EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION

KW - FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT

KW - CHINESE VERSION

KW - EORTC QLQ-CX24

KW - QUESTIONNAIRE

U2 - 10.1111/1471-0528.13251

DO - 10.1111/1471-0528.13251

M3 - Literature review

C2 - 25559096

VL - 122

SP - 615

EP - 622

JO - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

JF - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

SN - 1470-0328

IS - 5

ER -