Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 327

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Health-related quality of life in long-term head and neck cancer survivors: a comparison with general population norms

Open access
Hammerlid, E, Taft, C·2001·British Journal of Cancer

Abstract

To examine the health-related quality of life (HRQL) in long-term head and neck (H&N) cancer survivors compared with general population norms. HRQL was assessed with three standardized questionnaires: the SF-36 Health Survey (Short Form 36) and the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-H&N35 (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, -Core 30 and -Head and Neck 35 cancer module). Altogether 135 H&N cancer patients (mean age 62 years, 31% females) of 151 survivors (89% acceptance) from a longitudinal HRQL study (n = 232) were included 3 years after diagnosis. The H&N cancer patients' SF-36 scores did not differ significantly from those of an age- and sex-matched sample (n = 871) from the Swedish normative population, except on the role-physical functioning scale. On the other hand, treatment-related side-effects and disease-specific problems (e.g., swallowing, local pain and dry mouth) measured by the H&N cancer module were, with few exceptions, significantly worse than norm values. Gender comparisons revealed that female H&N cancer patients generally scored better than the norms on both the SF-36 and the EORTC QLQ-C30, while the male patients scored significantly worse on most SF-36 scales. Patients > or =65 years more often scored worse than the norm than did patients <65. Clinically relevant differences were found on the majority of SF-36 scales in comparison of tumour sites, however, comparisons of patients with small (stage I+II) versus advanced (stage III+IV) tumours revealed few differences. Three years after diagnosis H&N cancer patients still suffer significant functional limitations/problems related to their disease and its treatment but these problems do not generally affect their overall HRQL. Tumour stage no longer differentiates HRQL at 3 years, however, factors related to the patients' age, gender and location of the tumour appear to have bearing on their reported health status.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1054/bjoc.2000.1576

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 327

Metadata

Authors
Hammerlid, E., & Taft, C.
Venue
British Journal of Cancer
Published
2001
Volume
84
Issue
2
Pages
149-156
ISSN
  • 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-1827
OpenAlex
W2138843914
Cited by
327
References
3
FWCI
3.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Health-related quality of life in long-term head and neck cancer survivors: a comparison with general population norms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1054/bjoc.2000.1576
The paper
Hammerlid, E., & Taft, C. (2001). Health-related quality of life in long-term head and neck cancer survivors: a comparison with general population norms. British Journal of Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.2000.1576

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.