Patient versus clinician symptom reporting using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events: results of a questionnaire-based study.
By E. Basch, A. Iasonos, T. McDonough, A. Barz, A. Culkin, M. Kris, H. Scher, D. Schrag. The Lancet Oncology, 2006
595 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4f174d3f3f5657be2e44ca985190f22d2b7f0e54
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- M. Friedlander
- D. Goldstein
- A. Krishnan
- C. Lin
- J. Cassidy
- Susanna B. Park
- Roxanne E. Jensen
- M. Koltzenburg
Citations in the corpus
- Chemotherapy‐induced peripheral neurotoxicity: A critical analysis (2013, methodology): “Consensus is that such a measure must include both objective evidence of neurological deficits and assessment of symptoms from a patient perspective,(44,45) as clinicianbased reporting of adverse events during chemotherapy typically underestimates the significance of symptoms compared with patient r”
- Electronic patient‐reported outcome systems in oncology clinical practice (2012, background): “Patients detected symptoms sooner and with a higher severity than clinician reports.(25,26) Research has also found that symptom assessments are not reliable across clinicians.”