BACKGROUND: The concept of quality of life (QOL) is essentially subjective, determined from the patient's point of view. Thus, an appropriate investigation and analysis of QOL as an indicator of medical treatment outcome is a task of some difficulty. The physician-led QOL assessment studies to date in Japan have suffered from insufficient knowledge and understanding of the diverse factors contributing to QOL, thereby contributing to a dearth of quality studies. Given this background, the Japanese Breast Cancer Society has established a Task Force for the development of guidelines to properly conduct QOL assessment studies. The present article reports the results of a large-scale systematic overview of QOL assessment studies for breast cancer patients that was undertaken as one part of this project. METHODS: Six databases were used in this overview: MEDLINE, CINAHL, CANCERLIT, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and Japan Centra Revuo Medicina. The search period was 1982-1999 for CINAHL, and 1990-1999 for the others. Following a check of the titles, important information was recorded on relevance and data collection forms. RESULTS: A systematic search was conducted of the literature on QOL assessment studies for breast cancer patients, and 1,954 articles were extracted from a check of titles. Using the relevance and data collection forms, the number of articles was further narrowed to 126. These articles were then classified according to the type and design of the study, the number of QOL and psychological measures used, frequency of use of each measure, and study focus and type of intervention. The results were then compiled. CONCLUSION: To date there have been almost no appropriate systematic overviews or guidelines issued for QOL assessment studies related to breast cancer, even on the international level. The results of the present study may contribute high-quality QOL information for evidence-based medicine, as it continues to gain global prevalence.
BACKGROUND: The concept of quality of life (QOL) is essentially subjective, determined from the patient's point of view. Thus, an appropriate investigation and analysis of QOL as an indicator of medical treatment outcome is a task of some difficulty. The physician-led QOL assessment studies to date in Japan have suffered from insufficient knowledge and understanding of the diverse factors contributing to QOL, thereby contributing to a dearth of quality studies. Given this background, the Japanese Breast Cancer Society has established a Task Force for the development of guidelines to properly conduct QOL assessment studies. The present article reports the results of a large-scale systematic overview of QOL assessment studies for breast cancerpatients that was undertaken as one part of this project. METHODS: Six databases were used in this overview: MEDLINE, CINAHL, CANCERLIT, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and Japan Centra Revuo Medicina. The search period was 1982-1999 for CINAHL, and 1990-1999 for the others. Following a check of the titles, important information was recorded on relevance and data collection forms. RESULTS: A systematic search was conducted of the literature on QOL assessment studies for breast cancerpatients, and 1,954 articles were extracted from a check of titles. Using the relevance and data collection forms, the number of articles was further narrowed to 126. These articles were then classified according to the type and design of the study, the number of QOL and psychological measures used, frequency of use of each measure, and study focus and type of intervention. The results were then compiled. CONCLUSION: To date there have been almost no appropriate systematic overviews or guidelines issued for QOL assessment studies related to breast cancer, even on the international level. The results of the present study may contribute high-quality QOL information for evidence-based medicine, as it continues to gain global prevalence.
Authors: Shiao Li Oei; Anja Thronicke; Matthias Kröz; Philipp von Trott; Friedemann Schad; Harald Matthes Journal: Integr Cancer Ther Date: 2020 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.279