Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 411

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quality of Life in Rectal Cancer Patients: A Four-Year Prospective Study

Open access
Engel, Jutta, Kerr, Jacqueline, Schlesinger-Raab, Anne, Eckel, Renate, Sauer, Hansjörg, Hölzel, Dieter·2003·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term quality of life in a population-based sample of rectal cancer patients. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Quality of life in rectal cancer patients who suffer reduced bowel and sexual function is very important. Few studies, however, have long term follow-up data or sufficient sample sizes for reliable comparisons between operation groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 4-year prospective study of rectal cancer patients' quality of life was assessed by using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-30 and CR38 questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 329 patients returned questionnaires. Overall, anterior resection patients had better quality of life scores than abdominoperineal extirpation patients. High-anterior resection patients had significantly better scores than both low-anterior resection and abdominoperineal extirpation patients. Low-anterior resection patients, however, overall had a better quality of life than abdominoperineal extirpation patients, especially after 4 years. Abdominoperineal extirpation patients' quality of life scores did not improve over time. Stoma patients had significantly worse quality of life scores than nonstoma patients. Quality of life improved greatly for patients whose stoma was reversed. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior resection and nonstoma patients, despite suffering micturition and defecation problems, had better quality of life scores than abdominoperineal extirpation and stoma patients. Comparisons between abdominoperineal extirpation and anterior resection patients should consider the effect of temporary stomas. Improvements in quality of life scores over time may be explained by reversal of temporary stomas or physiologic adaptation.

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 · 10.1097/01.sla.0000080823.38569.b0

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 411

Metadata

Authors
Engel, J., Kerr, J., Schlesinger-Raab, A., Eckel, R., Sauer, H., & Hölzel, D.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2003-08
Volume
238
Issue
2
Pages
203-213
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2094465379
Cited by
411
References
2
FWCI
7.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Quality of Life in Rectal Cancer Patients: A Four-Year Prospective Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.sla.0000080823.38569.b0
The paper
Engel, J., Kerr, J., Schlesinger-Raab, A., Eckel, R., Sauer, H., & Hölzel, D. (2003). Quality of Life in Rectal Cancer Patients: A Four-Year Prospective Study. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000080823.38569.b0

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.