| Title |
Utility of a patient-reported outcome in measuring functional impairment during autologous stem cell transplant in patients with multiple myeloma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality of Life Research, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11136-017-1759-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nina Shah, Qiuling Shi, Sergio Giralt, Loretta Williams, Qaiser Bashir, Muzaffar Qazilbash, Richard E. Champlin, Charles S. Cleeland, Xin Shelley Wang |
| Abstract |
We aimed to determine the utility of a patient-reported outcome (PRO) as it relates to patient performed testing (PPT) for measuring functional status in multiple myeloma patients after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT). Symptom interference on walking (a PRO) was measured by the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI). PPT was assessed via 6-min walk test (6MWT). Mixed effects modeling was used to examine (1) the longitudinal relationship between the MDASI score and 6MWT distance and (2) the MDASI scores between patients who did or did not complete the 6WMT. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to quantify the construct validity of the PRO by differentiating performance status. Seventy-nine patients were included. Mean 6MWT distance significantly correlated with MDASI-walking interference score (PRO) over the first month of auto-HCT (est = 6.09, p = 0.006). There was a significantly higher completion rate for MDASI versus 6MWT at each time point (p < 0.01). Patients who completed the 6MWT reported less interference on walking during the study period (est = 1.61, p < 0.0001). Finally, the PRO demonstrated significant construct validity for measuring functioning status with MDASI-walking against ECOG-PS as the anchor (AUC = 0.77, 95% CI 0.60-0.94, p = 0.003). The PRO of MDASI-walking interference is a valid physical functioning measure, correlating with an objective functional measure (6MWT) in MM patients undergoing auto-HCT. As patients with poorer functional status during therapy are less likely to complete PPT, this PRO may offer a more practical quantitative measure of functioning in patients. |
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 States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 20% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 13 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 14% |
| Psychology | 4 | 11% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 14 | 40% |
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 24 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,552,599
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#1,536
of 2,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,639
of 441,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#30
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 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 2,937 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 441,946 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.