| Title |
Optimal clinical assessment strategies for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN): a systematic review and Delphi survey
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Supportive Care in Cancer, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00520-017-3772-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J . Matt McCrary, David Goldstein, Frances Boyle, Keith Cox, Peter Grimison, Matthew C. Kiernan, Arun V. Krishnan, Craig R. Lewis, Kate Webber, Sally Baron-Hay, Lisa Horvath, Susanna B. Park, On behalf of the IN FOCUS Delphi working party |
| Abstract |
Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a prominent side effect of the treatment of cancer. Despite this frequent complication, there has been no comprehensive review and quality appraisal of CIPN assessments. The purpose of this study is to provide a definitive quality appraisal of CIPN assessment strategies for clinical use. Relevant studies were identified through database searches of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane. CIPN assessment strategies from included articles were extracted and initially rated by an oncologist and neurophysiologist according to criteria related to assessment depth, comprehensiveness, appropriateness, and reliability. The six highest scoring assessment strategies were the focus of a two-round Delphi survey of a working party of 32 physicians, nurses, and consumers to achieve consensus on the highest rated assessments for each criterion. The database search yielded 117 distinct CIPN assessments that were extracted from 2373 articles. Three patient-reported outcome surveys and three clinician-based assessments were included in the Delphi survey. No consensus was generated regarding the best overall CIPN assessment, although good (≥70%) consensus was achieved regarding the best assessment within each criterion. The Participant Neurotoxicity Questionnaire (PNQ) was rated the highest overall and patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment, while the Total Neuropathy Score clinical version (TNSc) was the highest rated clinician-based assessment. A diverse range of CIPN assessments currently exists. While several assessments assess CIPN symptoms with adequate comprehensiveness, depth, language, and feasibility, the consensus 'gold standard' clinical assessment remains to be established. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 19% |
| Researcher | 13 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 17 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 25% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 October 2017.
All research outputs
#14,546,491
of 23,295,606 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,848
of 4,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,961
of 318,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#53
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,295,606 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,686 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,158 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.