Home > Publications database > Measuring the Socioeconomic Impact of Cancer: A Systematic Review and Standardized Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Instruments. > print

001     300250
005     20250821115050.0
024 7 _ |2 pmid
|a pmid:40180755
024 7 _ |2 ISSN
|a 2509-4262
024 7 _ |2 ISSN
|a 2509-4254
024 7 _ |2 doi
|a 10.1007/s41669-025-00568-0
037 _ _ |a DKFZ-2025-00711
041 _ _ |a English
082 _ _ |a 610
100 1 _ |0 P:(DE-He78)e87b1ce9c94af84cffcf9279cece3738
|a Pham, Phu Duy
|b 0
|e First author
245 _ _ |a Measuring the Socioeconomic Impact of Cancer: A Systematic Review and Standardized Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Instruments.
260 _ _ |a [Cham]
|b Springer International Publishing
|c 2025
336 7 _ |2 DRIVER
|a article
336 7 _ |2 DataCite
|a Output Types/Journal article
336 7 _ |0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
|a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|s 1753776774_3431
|x Review Article
336 7 _ |2 BibTeX
|a ARTICLE
336 7 _ |2 ORCID
|a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
336 7 _ |0 0
|2 EndNote
|a Journal Article
500 _ _ |a #EA:C100#LA:C100# / 2025 Jul;9(4):519-539
520 _ _ |a A number of instruments have been developed to measure the socioeconomic impact (SEI) of cancer. A standardized comparison of the quality and content validity of these instruments is lacking. This study aimed to (1) conduct a standardized assessment of the quality of SEI instruments and (2) assess the content validity of these instruments using the conceptual framework developed by the Organization of European Cancer Institutes (OECI) for SEI analysis.We identified articles measuring the SEI of cancer with ad hoc and/or validated instruments from an existing database. These articles were the initial pearls in a systematic review of published articles that applied and validated these instruments using the pearl-growing search strategy in PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. The Evaluating the Measurement of Patient-Reported Outcomes (EMPRO) tool was utilized to provide quantitative assessment and comparison of the quality of identified instruments. To examine content validity, we allocated each instrument's items against the themes and sub-themes of the established conceptual framework for SEI analysis.We identified and investigated 21 validation studies using nine original instruments. The number of articles varied significantly among the identified instruments. The COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) instrument was the most frequently used, validated in ten different settings, whereas some newer instruments have not been applied yet. This variation resulted in significant differences in EMPRO overall scores among these instruments. Regarding content validity, we found that not all themes of the OECI framework were covered by the content of the instruments.The quality and the application of instruments measuring the SEI of cancer varied significantly. The content of the instruments seems not to cover all related themes of the applied OECI framework in this study. Further studies are warranted to confirm the quality and content validity of the instruments measuring the SEI of cancer.
536 _ _ |0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-313
|a 313 - Krebsrisikofaktoren und Prävention (POF4-313)
|c POF4-313
|f POF IV
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to DataCite, PubMed, , Journals: inrepo02.dkfz.de
700 1 _ |0 P:(DE-He78)7586e13ade56c5b4d4cba2fc411b0cf0
|a Ubels, Jasper
|b 1
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |0 P:(DE-He78)9600624b0539f0fa9344e8936954b93d
|a Eckford, Rachel
|b 2
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |0 P:(DE-He78)1f315d09721b91091df1ba78eb65cbaf
|a Schlander, Michael
|b 3
|e Last author
|u dkfz
773 _ _ |0 PERI:(DE-600)2874287-4
|a DOI:10.1007/s41669-025-00568-0
|n 4
|p 519-539
|t PharmacoEconomics - open
|v 9
|x 2509-4262
|y 2025
909 C O |o oai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:300250
|p VDB
910 1 _ |0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|6 P:(DE-He78)e87b1ce9c94af84cffcf9279cece3738
|a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|b 0
|k DKFZ
910 1 _ |0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|6 P:(DE-He78)7586e13ade56c5b4d4cba2fc411b0cf0
|a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|b 1
|k DKFZ
910 1 _ |0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|6 P:(DE-He78)9600624b0539f0fa9344e8936954b93d
|a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|b 2
|k DKFZ
910 1 _ |0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|6 P:(DE-He78)1f315d09721b91091df1ba78eb65cbaf
|a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|b 3
|k DKFZ
913 1 _ |0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-313
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-310
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF4
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|a DE-HGF
|b Gesundheit
|l Krebsforschung
|v Krebsrisikofaktoren und Prävention
|x 0
914 1 _ |y 2025
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|a JCR
|b PHARMACOECON-OPEN : 2022
|d 2024-12-16
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|a DBCoverage
|b SCOPUS
|d 2024-12-16
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|a DBCoverage
|b Medline
|d 2024-12-16
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|a DBCoverage
|b Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List
|d 2024-12-16
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0112
|2 StatID
|a WoS
|b Emerging Sources Citation Index
|d 2024-12-16
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|a DBCoverage
|b Web of Science Core Collection
|d 2024-12-16
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0501
|2 StatID
|a DBCoverage
|b DOAJ Seal
|d 2024-04-10T15:44:09Z
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0500
|2 StatID
|a DBCoverage
|b DOAJ
|d 2024-04-10T15:44:09Z
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|a Peer Review
|b DOAJ : Anonymous peer review
|d 2024-04-10T15:44:09Z
915 _ _ |0 LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNCNV
|2 V:(DE-HGF)
|a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC (No Version)
|b DOAJ
|d 2024-04-10T15:44:09Z
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900
|2 StatID
|a IF < 5
|d 2024-12-16
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0561
|2 StatID
|a Article Processing Charges
|d 2024-12-16
915 _ _ |0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0700
|2 StatID
|a Fees
|d 2024-12-16
920 2 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)C100-20160331
|k C100
|l Gesundheitsökonomie
|x 0
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)C100-20160331
|k C100
|l Gesundheitsökonomie
|x 0
920 0 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)C100-20160331
|k C100
|l Gesundheitsökonomie
|x 0
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)C100-20160331
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED

LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21