FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2034911930> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2034911930 endingPage "e3" @default.
• W2034911930 startingPage "e2" @default.
• W2034911930 abstract "Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) is a traditional and accepted measure of performance status in cancer patients.1Nabal Vicuña M. Porta Sales J. Naudí Farre C. Altisent Trota R. Tres Sánchez A. Life expectancy estimation in palliative care (II): the role of performance status and symptoms.Med Pal (Madrid). 2002; 9: 87-95Google Scholar It is a categorical scale that presents its results as percentages in decimals, ranging from 0% (dead) or 10% (moribund, fatal processes progressing rapidly) to 100% (normal, no complaint, no evidence of disease). An alternative decimal measure for advanced cancer patients is the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS).2Anderson F. Downing M.G. Hill J. Casorso L. Lerch N. Palliative performance scale (PPS): a new tool.J Palliat Care. 1996; 12: 5-11PubMed Google Scholar The use of decimal scales as intuitive tools to measure the intensity of different variables in patients, such as symptoms3Centeno C. Noguera A. López B. Carvajal A. Some tools of assessment used in palliative care (I): the Edmonton System Assessment System (ESAS).Med Pal (Madrid). 2004; 11: 239-245Google Scholar or perceived quality of life,4Mrus J.M. Yi M.S. Freedberg K.A. et al.Utilities derived from visual analog scale scores in patients with HIV/AIDS.Med Decis Making. 2003; 23: 414-421Crossref PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar is a standard in palliative care. Visual analog scales (VAS), numerical rating scales (NRS), and verbal rating scales (VRS) are reliable and valid when rating symptom intensity, but VRS and NRS measures tend to be preferred over VAS measures by patients, as NRS measures are less abstract and easier to understand.5Dworkin R.H. Turk D.C. Farrar J.T. et al.Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations.Pain. 2005; 113: 9-19Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2565) Google Scholar We hypothesized that an intuitive decimal expression of perceived performance status in cancer patients could be reliable enough to substitute for the categorical KPS, which requires the aid of a table including 11 different categories: 10 (10%–100%) that fit for people alive and one (0%) that includes dead patients. We prospectively evaluated the performance status of 50 cancer patients. To avoid carryover bias, the initial evaluation was intuitive and presented as an NRS from 10% to 100%, and it was followed by the numerical categorization, both for KPS (for the whole sample) and PPS (only for advanced cancer patients). Four experienced professionals participated; all had access to an auxiliary leaflet, including a sample of both KPS and PPS scales to facilitate the categorization. Two specialists evaluated both advanced and nonadvanced patients with cancer: one medical oncologist (A.S.) estimated the performance status (NRS, KPS, and PPS) of 20 patients, and one radiation oncologist (M.L.V.) evaluated 15 other patients. One palliative care nurse (C.G.) and one palliative care physician (S.H.), who treat the same patients, gave independent NRS evaluations of performance status of 15 advanced cancer patients assisted at the Palliative Care Unit. After their respective NRS estimations, they defined together the categorical performance status (KPS and PPS) of every patient as part of their Palliative Team work. As a whole, we included in the analysis 65 performance status evaluations in 50 cancer patients. The characteristics of the patients were male/female: 31/19; median age: 65 years (range 20–94); primary tumor: digestive 19, breast 9, head and neck 7, prostate 6, others 9; advanced cancer: 33 (66%); and receiving palliative care: 20 (40%). Median value of measured performance status for every one of all three scales (KPS, PPS [only in advanced cancer patients], and NRS) was 50%. The reliability of results was evaluated with the percentage of coincidences and with Cohen's kappa, a chance-corrected measure of agreement between two different observations of the same process that ranges from 0 to 1. According to kappa results, the strength of agreement could be divided into six categories: 0.00–0.20, very low; 0.21–0.40, low; 0.41–0.60, moderate; 0.61–0.80, full; and 0.81–1.00, almost perfect. A kappa>0.70 is considered satisfactory. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 15.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). We found full agreement between KPS and NRS in 51 (78%) measures; in seven, the value was 10% higher in NRS than in KPS, and in seven, 10% lower in NRS than in KPS. This translates to a kappa of 0.75. When we studied the reliability between PPS and NRS only in palliative patients, we found full agreement in 28 (58%) of 48 determinations; in 11, the value was 10% higher on the NRS than the PPS, and in nine, it was 10% lower on the NRS than the KPS (with a kappa of 0.52). Data on interobserver agreement in NRS in the same patients are limited to coupled evaluations of advanced cancer patients done by the palliative care physician and nurse, where they achieve full agreement in 12 (80%) of 15 evaluations, with a kappa of 0.72. The percentage of complete agreement for the NRS and KPS in the same professional is higher than that presented for the KPS when evaluated by different professionals,6Olver I.N. Sivanthan T. Chi M. Purnell C. Observer error in grading performance status in cancer patients.Support Care Cancer. 1999; 7: 332-335Crossref PubMed Scopus (109) Google Scholar and its kappa value represents more agreement than the interrater reliability of the same evaluators over time with the PPS.7Ho F. Lau F. Downing M.G. Lesperance M. A reliability and validity study of the Palliative Performance Scale.BMC Palliat Care. 2008; 7: 10Crossref PubMed Scopus (133) Google Scholar The previous knowledge of categorical scales by experts could induce a possible bias of our results, as they could advance in NRS the category they will assign with KPS or PPS. This bias cannot be confirmed, as only two participants (C.G. and S.H.) fully recalled the KPS, and all of them required a PPS sample to categorize advanced cancer patients. Although the results of our exploratory trial can be considered as preliminary and must be confirmed in further studies, it seems that, when used by expert professionals, an easier and intuitive decimal NRS measure of performance status in cancer patients may replace the KPS in daily practice. To also show their reliability in clinical research, a complete validation study is being designed. As the agreement between the NRS and PPS is only moderate, we cannot propose the decimal NRS measurement of performance status to be substituted for the PPS in advanced cancer patients." @default.
• W2034911930 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2034911930 creator A5017965799 @default.
• W2034911930 creator A5039679854 @default.
• W2034911930 creator A5056655133 @default.
• W2034911930 creator A5089673661 @default.
• W2034911930 date "2010-05-01" @default.
• W2034911930 modified "2023-10-03" @default.
• W2034911930 title "Intuitive Numeric Rating Scale to Measure Performance Status in Cancer Patients" @default.
• W2034911930 cites W1966927770 @default.
• W2034911930 cites W1981227632 @default.
• W2034911930 cites W2003191497 @default.
• W2034911930 cites W2021028449 @default.
• W2034911930 cites W2029662381 @default.
• W2034911930 cites W2078239005 @default.
• W2034911930 cites W2149924726 @default.
• W2034911930 cites W2413565399 @default.
• W2034911930 cites W3194956376 @default.
• W2034911930 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2009.12.004" @default.
• W2034911930 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20362413" @default.
• W2034911930 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2034911930 type Work @default.
• W2034911930 sameAs 2034911930 @default.
• W2034911930 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2034911930 countsByYear W20349119302012 @default.
• W2034911930 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2034911930 hasAuthorship W2034911930A5017965799 @default.
• W2034911930 hasAuthorship W2034911930A5039679854 @default.
• W2034911930 hasAuthorship W2034911930A5056655133 @default.
• W2034911930 hasAuthorship W2034911930A5089673661 @default.
• W2034911930 hasBestOaLocation W20349119301 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C124101348 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C2778755073 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C2780009758 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C58640448 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConcept C83849319 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C105795698 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C121608353 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C124101348 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C126322002 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C205649164 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C2778755073 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C2780009758 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C33923547 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C41008148 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C58640448 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C71924100 @default.
• W2034911930 hasConceptScore W2034911930C83849319 @default.
• W2034911930 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2034911930 hasLocation W20349119301 @default.
• W2034911930 hasLocation W20349119302 @default.
• W2034911930 hasOpenAccess W2034911930 @default.
• W2034911930 hasPrimaryLocation W20349119301 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W2075397478 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W2365364931 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W2367251144 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W2418638721 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W2900695553 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W3015764575 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W3042125766 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W4205794217 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W4234674551 @default.
• W2034911930 hasRelatedWork W4234869326 @default.
• W2034911930 hasVolume "39" @default.
• W2034911930 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2034911930 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2034911930 magId "2034911930" @default.
• W2034911930 workType "article" @default.