483
Views
25
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Patient interpretation of the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) Short Form

, , , , &
Pages 1391-1400 | Published online: 16 Aug 2019

References

  • Arends J, Bachmann P, Baracos V, et al. ESPEN guidelines on nutrition in cancer patients. Clin Nutr. 2017;36(1):11–48. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2016.07.01527637832
  • Guerra RS, Fonseca I, Sousa AS, Jesus A, Pichel F, Amaral TF. ESPEN diagnostic criteria for malnutrition – a validation study in hospitalized patients. Clin Nutr. 2017;36(5):1326–1332. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2016.08.02227642055
  • Britton B, McCarter K, Baker A, et al. Eating As Treatment (EAT) study protocol: a stepped-wedge, randomised controlled trial of a health behaviour change intervention provided by dietitians to improve nutrition in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy. BMJ Open. 2015;5(7):e008921. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008921
  • Bauer J, Capra S, Ferguson M. Use of the scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) as a nutrition assessment tool in patients with cancer. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2002;56(8):779–785. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.160141212122555
  • Rodrigues CS, Chaves GV. Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment in relation to site, stage of the illness, reason for hospital admission, and mortality in patients with gynecological tumors. Support Care Cancer. 2015;23(3):871–879. doi:10.1007/s00520-014-2409-725223349
  • Rodrigues CS, Lacerda MS, Chaves GV. Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment as a prognosis tool in women with gynecologic cancer. Nutrition. 2015;31(11–12):1372–1378. doi:10.1016/j.nut.2015.06.00126429658
  • Isenring E, Bauer J, Capra S. The scored Patient-generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) and its association with quality of life in ambulatory patients receiving radiotherapy. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2003;57(2):305–309. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.160155212571664
  • Abbott J, Teleni L, McKavanagh D, Watson J, McCarthy AL, Isenring E. Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form (PG-SGA SF) is a valid screening tool in chemotherapy outpatients. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(9):3883–3887. doi:10.1007/s00520-016-3196-027095352
  • Spotten L, Corish C, Lorton C, et al. Subjective taste and smell changes in treatment-naive people with solid tumours. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(7):3201–3208. doi:10.1007/s00520-016-3133-226945569
  • Isenring E, Cross G, Daniels L, Kellett E, Koczwara B. Validity of the malnutrition screening tool as an effective predictor of nutritional risk in oncology outpatients receiving chemotherapy. Support Care Cancer. 2006;14(11):1152–1156. doi:10.1007/s00520-006-0070-516622648
  • Detsky AS, McLaughlin JR, Baker JP, et al. What is subjective global assessment of nutritional status? JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1987;11(1):8–13. doi:10.1177/0148607187011001083820522
  • Ottery FD. Definition of standardized nutritional assessment and interventional pathways in oncology. Nutrition. 1996;12(1 Suppl):S15–S19.8850213
  • Gabrielson DK, Scaffidi D, Leung E, et al. Use of an abridged scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (abPG-SGA) as a nutritional screening tool for cancer patients in an outpatient setting. Nutr Cancer. 2013;65(2):234–239. doi:10.1080/01635581.2013.75555423441610
  • Jager-Wittenaar H, Ottery FD. Assessing nutritional status in cancer: role of the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care. 2017;20(5):322–329. doi:10.1097/MCO.000000000000038928562490
  • Hsieh MC, Wang SH, Chuah SK, Lin YH, Lan J, Rau KM. A prognostic model using inflammation- and nutrition-based scores in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma treated with chemotherapy. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(17):e3504. doi:10.1097/MD.000000000000486427124056
  • Harter J, Orlandi SP, Gonzalez MC. Nutritional and functional factors as prognostic of surgical cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25(8):2525–2530. doi:10.1007/s00520-017-3661-428303380
  • Vigano AL, di Tomasso J, Kilgour RD, et al. The abridged patient-generated subjective global assessment is a useful tool for early detection and characterization of cancer cachexia. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. 2014;114(7):1088–1098. doi:10.1016/j.jand.2013.09.02724462323
  • Sealy MJ, Nijholt W, Stuiver MM, et al. Content validity across methods of malnutrition assessment in patients with cancer is limited. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2016;76:125–136. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.02.02026931291
  • Wiering B, de Boer D, Delnoij D. Patient involvement in the development of patient-reported outcome measures: a scoping review. Health Expect. 2017;20(1):11–23. doi:10.1111/hex.1244226889874
  • Mallinson S. Listening to respondents: a qualitative assessment of the Short-form 36 health status questionnaire. Soc Sci Med. 2002;54(1):11–21.11820675
  • Willis GB, Artino AR Jr. What do our respondents think we’re asking? Using cognitive interviewing to improve medical education surveys. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5(3):353–356. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-13-00154.124404294
  • Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, et al. Content validity–establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 2–assessing respondent understanding. Value Health. 2011;14(8):978–988. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.01322152166
  • Solheim TS, Laird BJA, Balstad TR, et al. A randomized phase II feasibility trial of a multimodal intervention for the management of cachexia in lung and pancreatic cancer. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2017;8(5):778–788. doi:10.1002/jcsm.1220128614627
  • Vagnildhaug OM, Balstad TR, Almberg SS, et al. A cross-sectional study examining the prevalence of cachexia and areas of unmet need in patients with cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2018;26(6):1871–1880. doi:10.1007/s00520-017-4022-z29274028
  • Kondrup J, Rasmussen HH, Hamberg O, Stanga Z, Ad Hoc EWG. Nutritional risk screening (NRS 2002): a new method based on an analysis of controlled clinical trials. Clin Nutr. 2003;22(3):321–336.12765673
  • Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982;5(6):649–655.7165009
  • Paap MC, Lange L, van der Palen J, Bode C. Using the three-step test interview to understand how patients perceive the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD patients (SGRQ-C). Qual Life Res. 2016;25(6):1561–1570. doi:10.1007/s11136-015-1192-326615616
  • Bergh I, Kvalem IL, Aass N, Hjermstad MJ. What does the answer mean? A qualitative study of how palliative cancer patients interpret and respond to the edmonton symptom assessment system. Palliat Med. 2011;25(7):716–724. doi:10.1177/026921631039598521248179
  • Watanabe S, Nekolaichuk C, Beaumont C, Mawani A. The Edmonton symptom assessment system–what do patients think? Support Care Cancer. 2009;17(6):675–683. doi:10.1007/s00520-008-0522-118953577
  • Schag CC, Heinrich RL, Ganz PA. Karnofsky performance status revisited: reliability, validity, and guidelines. J Clin Oncol. 1984;2(3):187–193. doi:10.1200/JCO.1984.2.3.1876699671
  • Malterud K. Systematic text condensation: a strategy for qualitative analysis. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40(8):795–805. doi:10.1177/140349481246503023221918
  • Polkinghorne DE. Language and meaning: data collection in qualitative research. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2005;52(2):137–145. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.137
  • Thayssen S, Hansen DG, Sondergaard J, Hoybye MT, Christensen PM, Hansen HP. Completing a questionnaire at home prior to needs assessment in general practice: a qualitative study of cancer patients’ experience. Patient. 2016;9(3):223–230. doi:10.1007/s40271-015-0144-x26518199
  • Wintner LM, Sztankay M, Aaronson N, et al. The use of EORTC measures in daily clinical practice – a synopsis of a newly developed manual. Eur J Cancer. 2016;68:73–81. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2016.08.02427721057