Health-related quality of life metrics as endpoints in surgical trials: hype or hope?

Robert Armbrust, Jennifer Davies-Oliveira, Jalid Sehouli
In: International Journal of Gynecological Cancer · 2024 · vol. 34(3) , pp. 447–450 · doi:10.1136/ijgc-2023-005127 · PMID:38438183 · W4392370143
review OA: bronze CC0
📄 Open PDF View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-14 ⓘ

This paper evaluates the utility of health-related quality of life metrics as endpoints in surgical trials, questioning their current application and future potential.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

The management of gynecological cancer has evolved considerably over the past decades in almost every field of treatment. Surgery plays a major role in the treatment algorithm. However, these invasive interventions can have profound implications for the quality of life (QoL) of affected individuals. The routine implementation of QoL measurements in clinical trials has become common, reflecting a new research 'standard', despite the fact that all available QoL instruments were not designed nor validated prospectively for surgical trials. This review seeks to address whether patient reported outcomes and QoL measurements rightfully take center stage in current surgical trials, leading to direct implementation for the benefit of patient care, or are they simply more of a researcher's hope. We will also provide an 'action plan' to better implement QoL measurements in future surgical trials.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2024) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

References (35)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK