Patient-reported outcome measures for follow-up after gynaecological cancer treatment

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Volumn 2013, Issue 11, 2013, Pages

  Nama, Vivek ^a   Nordin, Andy ^b   Bryant, Andrew ^c  

^a ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b EAST KENT HOSPITALS UNIVERSITY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^c NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER THERAPY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE GENITAL TRACT CANCER; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LONG TERM SURVIVAL; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOME; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; FEMALE; FEMALE GENITAL TRACT TUMOR; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; SELF REPORT; ALL CAUSE MORTALITY; ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL OUTCOME; META ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RATING SCALE;

FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GENITAL NEOPLASMS, FEMALE; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); SELF REPORT;

EID: 84900782204     PISSN: 14651858     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010299.pub2     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Ashing-Giwa KT, Lim JW, Tang J. Surviving cervical cancer: does health-related quality of life influence survival?. Gynecologic Oncology 2010;118(1):35-42. [PUBMED: 20382414]
2. Chase D.M, Watanabe T, Monk B. J. Assessement and significance of quality of life in women with gynecologic cancer. Future Oncology 2010;6(8):1279-887.
3. Greimel E, Thiel L, Peintinger F, Cegnar I, Pongratz E. Prospective assessment of quality of life of female cancer patients. Gynecologic Oncology 2002;85(1):140-147.
4. Greimel E, Bottomley A, Cull A, Waldenstron A. C, Arraras J, Chauvenet L, et al. An international field study of the reliability and validity of a disease-specific questionnaire module (the QLQ-OV28) in assessing the quality of life of patients with ovarian cancer. European Journal of Cancer 2003;39(10):1402-8.
5. Greimel E, Daghofer F, Petru E. Prospective assessment of quality of life in long-term ovarian cancer survivors. International Journal of Cancer 2011;128(12):3005-11.
6. Gupta D, Grutsch JF, Lis CG. Patient satisfaction with quality of life as a prognostic indicator in ovarian cancer patients treated in an integrative treatment setting. Journal of the Society of Integrative Oncology 2008;6(3):98-104.
7. Jordan S, Osann K, Wenzel L, Arroyo A, Tewari K, Chase D. Can patient-reported symptom assessment be useful in a gynecologic oncology office practice? A prospective study using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) in a diverse population. Gynecologic Oncology; Conference: 2012 Annual Meeting of the Western Association of Gynecologic Oncologists, WAGO 2012 Huntington Beach, CA United States. 2012.
8. Klee M, Groenvold M, Machin D. Quality of life of Danish women: population-based norms of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Quality of Life Research 1997; Vol. 6, issue 1:27-34.
9. Lerman R, Jarski R, Rea H, Gellish R, Vicini F. Improving symptoms and quality of life of female cancer survivors: A randomized controlled study. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2012;19(2):373-8.
10. Seow H, Barbera L, Sutradhar R, Howell D, Dudgeon D, Atzema C, et al. Trajectory of performance status and symptom scores for patients with cancer during the last six months of life. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2011;29(9):1151-8.
11. Vistad I, Moy BW, Salvesen HB, Liavaag AH. Follow-up routines in gynecological cancer - time for a change?. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2011.;90(7):707-18.
12. American Cancer Society. Cancer Projected To Become Leading Cause Of Death Worldwide In 2010. ScienceDaily; www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081209111516.htm (accessed 30 June 2013).
13. Deeks JJ, Altman DG, Bradburn MJ. Statistical methods for examining heterogeneity and combining results from several studies in meta-analysis. In: Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DG editor(s). Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context. 2nd Edition. London: BMJ Publication Group, 2001.
14. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986;7(3):177-88.
15. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2008: Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 10 [Internet]. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer. globocan.iarc.fr 2010; Vol. 2.0.
16. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327(7414):557-60.
17. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
18. Kew FM, Cruickshank DJ. Routine follow-up after treatment for a gynecological cancer: a survey of practice. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2006;15(1):380-4.
19. Kew FM, Galaal K, Maderville H. Patients' views of follow-up after treatment for gynaecological cancer. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2009;29(2):135-42.
20. Lydon A, Beavery K, Newbery C, Wray J. Routine follow-up after treatment for ovarian cancer in the United Kingdom (UK): patient and health professional views. European Journal of Oncology Nursing 2009;13(5):336-43.
21. Parmar MK, Torri V, Stewart L. Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints. Statistics in Medicine 1998;17(24):2815-34.
22. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). 5.2. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2012.
23. Nama V, Nordin A, Bryant A. Patient-Reported outcome measures for follow-up after gynaecological cancer treatment. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010299]