Cited by 149Cancer survivorship and careHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifePain Management and Opioid Use

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The clinical significance of quality of life assessments in oncology: a summary for clinicians

Sloan, Jeff A., Frost, Marlene H., Berzon, Rick, Dueck, Amylou, Guyatt, Gordon, Moinpour, Carol, Sprangers, Mirjam, Ferrans, Carol, Cella, David, Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group·2006·Supportive Care in Cancer

Abstract

Background A series of six manuscripts with an introduction appeared in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings, based upon the collective effort of 30 individuals with an interest and expertise in assessing the clinical significance of quality of life (QOL) assessments. The series of manuscripts described the state of the science of QOL assessments in oncology clinical research and practice and included extensive literature and theoretical justification for the continued inclusion of QOL in oncology clinical research and practice. Objectives The purpose of this paper is to produce a summary of these articles and to supplement these works with additional information that was gleaned from subsequent meetings and discussions of this material. The primary aim of this paper is to present a cogent and concise description for clinicians to facilitate the incorporation of QOL assessments into oncology clinical research and practice. The theoretical discussion is supplemented with an example of how the various ideas can be operationalized in an oncology clinical trial.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00520-006-0085-y

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Karnofsky DA (1967) Clinical evaluation of anticancer drugs. Gann Monogr Cancer Res 2:223–234
  2. McCorkle R, Cooley ME, Shea JA (1998) A user’s manual for the Symptom Distress Scale. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
  3. Nunnally CC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, USA
  4. Sloan JA, Vargas-Chanes D, Kamath CC et al (2003) Detecting worms, ducks and elephants: a simple approach for defining clinically relevant effects in quality-of-life measures. J Cancer Integ Med 1:41–47

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 149

Metadata

Authors
Sloan, J. A., Frost, M. H., Berzon, R., Dueck, A., Guyatt, G., Moinpour, C., Sprangers, M., Ferrans, C., Cella, D., & Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group
Affiliations
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Boehringer Ingelheim (Germany) (DE)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Sloan, Jeff A.
Venue
Supportive Care in Cancer
Published
2006-06-23
Volume
14
Issue
10
Pages
988-998
ISSN
  • 0941-4355 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-7339
OpenAlex
W2072639223
Cited by
149
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 15
FWCI
1.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Supportive Care in Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
Keywords
quality of life assessment, oncology, clinical significance, cancer clinical trials, patient-reported outcomes, clinical practice
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Medical Oncology, Neoplasms, Physician-Patient Relations, Quality of Life, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Sickness Impact Profile

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review