Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 534

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Incidence and severity of self-reported chemotherapy side effects in routine care: A prospective cohort study

Open access
Pearce, Alison, Haas, Marion, Viney, Rosalie, Pearson, Sallie-Anne, Haywood, Philip, Brown, Chris, Ward, Robyn·2017·PLOS ONE

Abstract

AIM: Chemotherapy side effects are often reported in clinical trials; however, there is little evidence about their incidence in routine clinical care. The objective of this study was to describe the frequency and severity of patient-reported chemotherapy side effects in routine care across treatment centres in Australia. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of individuals with breast, lung or colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy. Side effects were identified by patient self-report. The frequency, prevalence and incidence rates of side effects were calculated by cancer type and grade, and cumulative incidence curves for each side effect computed. Frequencies of side effects were compared between demographic subgroups using chi-squared statistics. RESULTS: Side effect data were available for 449 eligible individuals, who had a median follow-up of 5.64 months. 86% of participants reported at least one side effect during the study period and 27% reported a grade IV side effect, most commonly fatigue or dyspnoea. Fatigue was the most common side effect overall (85%), followed by diarrhoea (74%) and constipation (74%). Prevalence and incidence rates were similar across side effects and cancer types. Age was the only demographic factor associated with the incidence of side effects, with older people less likely to report side effects. CONCLUSION: This research has produced the first Australian estimates of self-reported incidence of chemotherapy side effects in routine clinical care. Chemotherapy side effects in routine care are common, continue throughout chemotherapy and can be serious. This work confirms the importance of observational data in providing clinical practice-relevant information to decision-makers.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0184360

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 534

Metadata

Authors
Pearce, A., Haas, M., Viney, R., Pearson, S.-A., Haywood, P., Brown, C., & Ward, R.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2017-10-10
Volume
12
Issue
10
Pages
e0184360
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2762997972
Cited by
534
References
5
FWCI
14.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Incidence and severity of self-reported chemotherapy side effects in routine care: A prospective cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0184360
The paper
Pearce, A., Haas, M., Viney, R., Pearson, S.-A., Haywood, P., Brown, C., & Ward, R. (2017). Incidence and severity of self-reported chemotherapy side effects in routine care: A prospective cohort study. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0184360

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.