Evidence mapPaperPMID 38740611Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024

Longitudinal assessment of real-world patient adherence: a 12-month electronic patient-reported outcomes follow-up of women with early breast cancer undergoing treatment.

Pimrapat Gebert, Anna Maria Hage, Jens-Uwe Blohmer, Robert Roehle, Maria Margarete Karsten

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Patients' expectations and barriers towards postoperative telehealth follow-up after oncologic breast surgery in France.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Pimrapat GebertBerlin Institute of Health at Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5946-7137
Anna Maria HageDepartment of Gynecology With Breast Center, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1612-8052
Jens-Uwe BlohmerDepartment of Gynecology With Breast Center, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7969-250X
Robert RoehleBerlin Institute of Health at Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8130-6524
Maria Margarete KarstenDepartment of Gynecology With Breast Center, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. maria-margarete.karsten@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7587-7550

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) assess patients' health status and quality of life, improving patient care and treatment effects, yet little is known about their use and adherence in routine patient care.

aimsWe evaluated the adherence of invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients to ePROs follow-up and whether specific patient characteristics are related to longitudinal non-adherence.

methodsSince November 2016, the Breast Center at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin has implemented an ongoing prospective PRO routine program, requiring patients to complete ePROs assessments and consent to email-based follow-up in the first 12 months after therapy starts. Frequencies and summary statistics are presented. Multiple logistic regression models were performed to determine an association between patient characteristics and non-adherence.

resultsOut of 578 patients, 239 patients (41.3%, 95%CI: 37.3-45.5%) completed baseline assessment and all five ePROs follow-up during the first 12 months after therapy. On average, above 70% of those patients responded to the ePROs follow-up assessment. Adherence to the ePROs follow-up was higher during the COVID-19 pandemic than in the time periods before (47.4% (111/234) vs. 33.6% (71/211)). Factors associated with longitudinal non-adherence were younger age, a higher number of comorbidities, no chemotherapy, and a low physical functioning score in the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline.

conclusionsThe study reveals moderate adherence to 12-month ePROs follow-up assessments in invasive early breast cancer and DCIS patients, with response rates ranging from 60 to 80%. Emphasizing the benefits for young patients and those with high disease burdens might further increase adherence.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsPatient CompliancePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeAdultAgedCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingCOVID-19FemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLongitudinal StudiesMiddle AgedProspective StudiesComplianceEarly Breast cancerOncologyReturn rateWeb-based questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID38740611
PMCPMC11090970

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.