An increasing number of qualitative research papers in oncology and palliative care: does it mean a thorough development of the ... View Full Text


Ontology type: schema:ScholarlyArticle      Open Access: True


Article Info

DATE

2004-01-23

AUTHORS

Claudia Borreani, Guido Miccinesi, Cinzia Brunelli, Micaela Lina

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the second half of the nineties, a scientific debate about the usefulness of qualitative research in medicine began in the main medical journals as well as the amount of "qualitative" papers published on peer reviewed journals has noticeably increased during these last years. Nevertheless the label of qualitative methodology has been assigned to an heterogeneous collection of studies. Some of them show a complete awareness of the specificity of this kind of research, while others are still largely influenced by the quantitative paradigm prevailing in the medical field. The concern with the rigour and credibility of qualitative methods has lead to the development of a number of checklist for assessing qualitative research. The purposes of this review were to describe the quality of the development of qualitative research in the medical field, focusing on oncology and palliative care, and to discuss the applicability of a descriptive checklist. METHODS: A review was conducted on Medline and PsycINFO databases. On the basis of their abstract, papers found have been classified considering: publication year, kind of journal, paper type, data gathering method, sample size and declared methodological approach. A sub sample of the previous papers was than selected and their methodological characteristics were evaluated based on a descriptive checklist. RESULTS: 351 abstracts and 26 full papers were analysed. An increase over time in the number of qualitative studies is evident. While most of the papers before 1999 were published on nursing journals (43%), afterwards also medical journals were largely represented. Psychological journals increased from 7% to 12%. The 22% of studies used a sample size lower than 15 and the 15% did not specify the sample size in the abstract. The methodological approach was also often not specified and the percentage increased in the second time period (from 73% to 80%). Grounded theory was the most employed methodological approach while phenomenology shows a decrease. Interview remains the most used data gathering method in both periods, even if it shows a 10% reductions, while focus group and multiple methods application both increase to 12%. The use of the descriptive checklist on the full text of the 26 papers shows that all the items present a larger percentage of satisfaction after 1 January 1999 than it was for the paper published before 1999. There seems to be two different types of quality criteria: specific and unspecific. The first ones mainly refer to qualitative paradigm (such as the relationship with the subject of research or evidence about how subjects perceived the research) and they are often not satisfied. In contrast unspecific criteria (such as the connection to an existing body of knowledge or systematic data gathering) which are mainly shared with the quantitative paradigm are more frequently satisfied. CONCLUSIONS: In oncology and palliative care the publication of qualitative studies increased during the nineties, reaching its peak in around 2000. The use of descriptive checklists even if it was not easy to apply, allows researchers to get a deeper insight into methodological facets that a global judgement may leave out. More... »

PAGES

7-7

References to SciGraph publications

  • 2001-06. Community cancer clinics: patients' perspectives in SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER
  • Identifiers

    URI

    http://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-2-7

    DOI

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-7

    DIMENSIONS

    https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1014593700

    PUBMED

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14741052


    Indexing Status Check whether this publication has been indexed by Scopus and Web Of Science using the SN Indexing Status Tool
    Incoming Citations Browse incoming citations for this publication using opencitations.net

    JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.

    TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT

    [
      {
        "@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json", 
        "about": [
          {
            "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/11", 
            "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
            "name": "Medical and Health Sciences", 
            "type": "DefinedTerm"
          }, 
          {
            "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/1117", 
            "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
            "name": "Public Health and Health Services", 
            "type": "DefinedTerm"
          }, 
          {
            "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
            "name": "Bibliometrics", 
            "type": "DefinedTerm"
          }, 
          {
            "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
            "name": "Humans", 
            "type": "DefinedTerm"
          }, 
          {
            "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
            "name": "Medical Oncology", 
            "type": "DefinedTerm"
          }, 
          {
            "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
            "name": "Palliative Care", 
            "type": "DefinedTerm"
          }, 
          {
            "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
            "name": "Qualitative Research", 
            "type": "DefinedTerm"
          }
        ], 
        "author": [
          {
            "affiliation": {
              "alternateName": "Psychology Unit, National Cancer Institute, Milan, Via Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy", 
              "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.417893.0", 
              "name": [
                "Psychology Unit, National Cancer Institute, Milan, Via Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy"
              ], 
              "type": "Organization"
            }, 
            "familyName": "Borreani", 
            "givenName": "Claudia", 
            "id": "sg:person.01117144035.36", 
            "sameAs": [
              "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01117144035.36"
            ], 
            "type": "Person"
          }, 
          {
            "affiliation": {
              "alternateName": "Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Study and Prevention of Cancer, Via di San Salvi 12, 50135 Florence, Italy", 
              "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/None", 
              "name": [
                "Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Study and Prevention of Cancer, Via di San Salvi 12, 50135 Florence, Italy"
              ], 
              "type": "Organization"
            }, 
            "familyName": "Miccinesi", 
            "givenName": "Guido", 
            "id": "sg:person.0602625725.40", 
            "sameAs": [
              "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.0602625725.40"
            ], 
            "type": "Person"
          }, 
          {
            "affiliation": {
              "alternateName": "Psychology Unit, National Cancer Institute, Milan, Via Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy", 
              "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.417893.0", 
              "name": [
                "Psychology Unit, National Cancer Institute, Milan, Via Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy"
              ], 
              "type": "Organization"
            }, 
            "familyName": "Brunelli", 
            "givenName": "Cinzia", 
            "id": "sg:person.01226440011.18", 
            "sameAs": [
              "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01226440011.18"
            ], 
            "type": "Person"
          }, 
          {
            "affiliation": {
              "alternateName": "Psychology Unit, National Cancer Institute, Milan, Via Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy", 
              "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.417893.0", 
              "name": [
                "Psychology Unit, National Cancer Institute, Milan, Via Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy"
              ], 
              "type": "Organization"
            }, 
            "familyName": "Lina", 
            "givenName": "Micaela", 
            "id": "sg:person.01071433302.37", 
            "sameAs": [
              "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01071433302.37"
            ], 
            "type": "Person"
          }
        ], 
        "citation": [
          {
            "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s005200000226", 
            "sameAs": [
              "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1037817208", 
              "https://doi.org/10.1007/s005200000226"
            ], 
            "type": "CreativeWork"
          }
        ], 
        "datePublished": "2004-01-23", 
        "datePublishedReg": "2004-01-23", 
        "description": "BACKGROUND: In the second half of the nineties, a scientific debate about the usefulness of qualitative research in medicine began in the main medical journals as well as the amount of \"qualitative\" papers published on peer reviewed journals has noticeably increased during these last years. Nevertheless the label of qualitative methodology has been assigned to an heterogeneous collection of studies. Some of them show a complete awareness of the specificity of this kind of research, while others are still largely influenced by the quantitative paradigm prevailing in the medical field. The concern with the rigour and credibility of qualitative methods has lead to the development of a number of checklist for assessing qualitative research. The purposes of this review were to describe the quality of the development of qualitative research in the medical field, focusing on oncology and palliative care, and to discuss the applicability of a descriptive checklist.\nMETHODS: A review was conducted on Medline and PsycINFO databases. On the basis of their abstract, papers found have been classified considering: publication year, kind of journal, paper type, data gathering method, sample size and declared methodological approach. A sub sample of the previous papers was than selected and their methodological characteristics were evaluated based on a descriptive checklist.\nRESULTS: 351 abstracts and 26 full papers were analysed. An increase over time in the number of qualitative studies is evident. While most of the papers before 1999 were published on nursing journals (43%), afterwards also medical journals were largely represented. Psychological journals increased from 7% to 12%. The 22% of studies used a sample size lower than 15 and the 15% did not specify the sample size in the abstract. The methodological approach was also often not specified and the percentage increased in the second time period (from 73% to 80%). Grounded theory was the most employed methodological approach while phenomenology shows a decrease. Interview remains the most used data gathering method in both periods, even if it shows a 10% reductions, while focus group and multiple methods application both increase to 12%. The use of the descriptive checklist on the full text of the 26 papers shows that all the items present a larger percentage of satisfaction after 1 January 1999 than it was for the paper published before 1999. There seems to be two different types of quality criteria: specific and unspecific. The first ones mainly refer to qualitative paradigm (such as the relationship with the subject of research or evidence about how subjects perceived the research) and they are often not satisfied. In contrast unspecific criteria (such as the connection to an existing body of knowledge or systematic data gathering) which are mainly shared with the quantitative paradigm are more frequently satisfied.\nCONCLUSIONS: In oncology and palliative care the publication of qualitative studies increased during the nineties, reaching its peak in around 2000. The use of descriptive checklists even if it was not easy to apply, allows researchers to get a deeper insight into methodological facets that a global judgement may leave out.", 
        "genre": "article", 
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1186/1477-7525-2-7", 
        "inLanguage": "en", 
        "isAccessibleForFree": true, 
        "isPartOf": [
          {
            "id": "sg:journal.1031326", 
            "issn": [
              "1477-7525"
            ], 
            "name": "Health and Quality of Life Outcomes", 
            "publisher": "Springer Nature", 
            "type": "Periodical"
          }, 
          {
            "issueNumber": "1", 
            "type": "PublicationIssue"
          }, 
          {
            "type": "PublicationVolume", 
            "volumeNumber": "2"
          }
        ], 
        "keywords": [
          "data gathering methods", 
          "medical field", 
          "gathering methods", 
          "heterogeneous collection", 
          "last years", 
          "methodology", 
          "paradigm", 
          "palliative care", 
          "methodological approach", 
          "method application", 
          "quality criteria", 
          "first one", 
          "research paper", 
          "thorough development", 
          "research", 
          "medical journals", 
          "peers", 
          "labels", 
          "collection", 
          "complete awareness", 
          "kind of research", 
          "quantitative paradigm", 
          "method", 
          "number", 
          "applicability", 
          "PsycINFO databases", 
          "database", 
          "paper types", 
          "sample size", 
          "full papers", 
          "qualitative study", 
          "second time period", 
          "applications", 
          "full text", 
          "text", 
          "different types", 
          "researchers", 
          "deeper insight", 
          "methodology of research", 
          "nineties", 
          "usefulness", 
          "amount", 
          "years", 
          "study", 
          "awareness", 
          "kind", 
          "field", 
          "concern", 
          "credibility", 
          "development", 
          "checklist", 
          "purpose", 
          "review", 
          "quality", 
          "oncology", 
          "care", 
          "descriptive checklist", 
          "MEDLINE", 
          "publication year", 
          "types", 
          "size", 
          "sub sample", 
          "previous paper", 
          "methodological characteristics", 
          "time", 
          "nursing journals", 
          "percentage", 
          "time period", 
          "period", 
          "Grounded Theory", 
          "focus groups", 
          "use", 
          "items", 
          "large percentage", 
          "satisfaction", 
          "criteria", 
          "one", 
          "global judgment", 
          "qualitative research papers", 
          "second half", 
          "half", 
          "scientific debate", 
          "qualitative research", 
          "medicine", 
          "journals", 
          "qualitative methodology", 
          "specificity", 
          "rigor", 
          "qualitative methods", 
          "number of checklists", 
          "basis", 
          "Abstract", 
          "approach", 
          "samples", 
          "characteristics", 
          "increase", 
          "theory", 
          "decrease", 
          "interviews", 
          "reduction", 
          "group", 
          "publications", 
          "insights", 
          "methodological facets", 
          "facets", 
          "judgments", 
          "debate", 
          "psychological journals", 
          "phenomenology", 
          "qualitative paradigm", 
          "peak", 
          "paper", 
          "main medical journals", 
          "multiple methods application", 
          "contrast unspecific criteria", 
          "unspecific criteria"
        ], 
        "name": "An increasing number of qualitative research papers in oncology and palliative care: does it mean a thorough development of the methodology of research?", 
        "pagination": "7-7", 
        "productId": [
          {
            "name": "dimensions_id", 
            "type": "PropertyValue", 
            "value": [
              "pub.1014593700"
            ]
          }, 
          {
            "name": "doi", 
            "type": "PropertyValue", 
            "value": [
              "10.1186/1477-7525-2-7"
            ]
          }, 
          {
            "name": "pubmed_id", 
            "type": "PropertyValue", 
            "value": [
              "14741052"
            ]
          }
        ], 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-7", 
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1014593700"
        ], 
        "sdDataset": "articles", 
        "sdDatePublished": "2022-01-01T18:14", 
        "sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/", 
        "sdPublisher": {
          "name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project", 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "sdSource": "s3://com-springernature-scigraph/baseset/20220101/entities/gbq_results/article/article_394.jsonl", 
        "type": "ScholarlyArticle", 
        "url": "https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-7"
      }
    ]
     

    Download the RDF metadata as:  json-ld nt turtle xml License info

    HOW TO GET THIS DATA PROGRAMMATICALLY:

    JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.

    curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-2-7'

    N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.

    curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-2-7'

    Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.

    curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-2-7'

    RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.

    curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/1477-7525-2-7'


     

    This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.

    225 TRIPLES      22 PREDICATES      148 URIs      139 LITERALS      12 BLANK NODES

    Subject Predicate Object
    1 sg:pub.10.1186/1477-7525-2-7 schema:about N0c71bb1707b44f6885a3964e72dcafd5
    2 N31c431e3dcfe45a9b27d10987d8f6a08
    3 N97cb288a96e444f1ad5c63bbe1b6c6e0
    4 Nbad9290eeb7f42059286dd9d914b33f3
    5 Ne3d97f29579246ffaf1a22617c2ba8d9
    6 anzsrc-for:11
    7 anzsrc-for:1117
    8 schema:author N4711467298fe4a849984ba3e0c44ab27
    9 schema:citation sg:pub.10.1007/s005200000226
    10 schema:datePublished 2004-01-23
    11 schema:datePublishedReg 2004-01-23
    12 schema:description BACKGROUND: In the second half of the nineties, a scientific debate about the usefulness of qualitative research in medicine began in the main medical journals as well as the amount of "qualitative" papers published on peer reviewed journals has noticeably increased during these last years. Nevertheless the label of qualitative methodology has been assigned to an heterogeneous collection of studies. Some of them show a complete awareness of the specificity of this kind of research, while others are still largely influenced by the quantitative paradigm prevailing in the medical field. The concern with the rigour and credibility of qualitative methods has lead to the development of a number of checklist for assessing qualitative research. The purposes of this review were to describe the quality of the development of qualitative research in the medical field, focusing on oncology and palliative care, and to discuss the applicability of a descriptive checklist. METHODS: A review was conducted on Medline and PsycINFO databases. On the basis of their abstract, papers found have been classified considering: publication year, kind of journal, paper type, data gathering method, sample size and declared methodological approach. A sub sample of the previous papers was than selected and their methodological characteristics were evaluated based on a descriptive checklist. RESULTS: 351 abstracts and 26 full papers were analysed. An increase over time in the number of qualitative studies is evident. While most of the papers before 1999 were published on nursing journals (43%), afterwards also medical journals were largely represented. Psychological journals increased from 7% to 12%. The 22% of studies used a sample size lower than 15 and the 15% did not specify the sample size in the abstract. The methodological approach was also often not specified and the percentage increased in the second time period (from 73% to 80%). Grounded theory was the most employed methodological approach while phenomenology shows a decrease. Interview remains the most used data gathering method in both periods, even if it shows a 10% reductions, while focus group and multiple methods application both increase to 12%. The use of the descriptive checklist on the full text of the 26 papers shows that all the items present a larger percentage of satisfaction after 1 January 1999 than it was for the paper published before 1999. There seems to be two different types of quality criteria: specific and unspecific. The first ones mainly refer to qualitative paradigm (such as the relationship with the subject of research or evidence about how subjects perceived the research) and they are often not satisfied. In contrast unspecific criteria (such as the connection to an existing body of knowledge or systematic data gathering) which are mainly shared with the quantitative paradigm are more frequently satisfied. CONCLUSIONS: In oncology and palliative care the publication of qualitative studies increased during the nineties, reaching its peak in around 2000. The use of descriptive checklists even if it was not easy to apply, allows researchers to get a deeper insight into methodological facets that a global judgement may leave out.
    13 schema:genre article
    14 schema:inLanguage en
    15 schema:isAccessibleForFree true
    16 schema:isPartOf N91043a3bc8c54f28a1a35e01fc96b6db
    17 Nd0f58c014fd44403a2b98727df3351ba
    18 sg:journal.1031326
    19 schema:keywords Abstract
    20 Grounded Theory
    21 MEDLINE
    22 PsycINFO databases
    23 amount
    24 applicability
    25 applications
    26 approach
    27 awareness
    28 basis
    29 care
    30 characteristics
    31 checklist
    32 collection
    33 complete awareness
    34 concern
    35 contrast unspecific criteria
    36 credibility
    37 criteria
    38 data gathering methods
    39 database
    40 debate
    41 decrease
    42 deeper insight
    43 descriptive checklist
    44 development
    45 different types
    46 facets
    47 field
    48 first one
    49 focus groups
    50 full papers
    51 full text
    52 gathering methods
    53 global judgment
    54 group
    55 half
    56 heterogeneous collection
    57 increase
    58 insights
    59 interviews
    60 items
    61 journals
    62 judgments
    63 kind
    64 kind of research
    65 labels
    66 large percentage
    67 last years
    68 main medical journals
    69 medical field
    70 medical journals
    71 medicine
    72 method
    73 method application
    74 methodological approach
    75 methodological characteristics
    76 methodological facets
    77 methodology
    78 methodology of research
    79 multiple methods application
    80 nineties
    81 number
    82 number of checklists
    83 nursing journals
    84 oncology
    85 one
    86 palliative care
    87 paper
    88 paper types
    89 paradigm
    90 peak
    91 peers
    92 percentage
    93 period
    94 phenomenology
    95 previous paper
    96 psychological journals
    97 publication year
    98 publications
    99 purpose
    100 qualitative methodology
    101 qualitative methods
    102 qualitative paradigm
    103 qualitative research
    104 qualitative research papers
    105 qualitative study
    106 quality
    107 quality criteria
    108 quantitative paradigm
    109 reduction
    110 research
    111 research paper
    112 researchers
    113 review
    114 rigor
    115 sample size
    116 samples
    117 satisfaction
    118 scientific debate
    119 second half
    120 second time period
    121 size
    122 specificity
    123 study
    124 sub sample
    125 text
    126 theory
    127 thorough development
    128 time
    129 time period
    130 types
    131 unspecific criteria
    132 use
    133 usefulness
    134 years
    135 schema:name An increasing number of qualitative research papers in oncology and palliative care: does it mean a thorough development of the methodology of research?
    136 schema:pagination 7-7
    137 schema:productId N0dc2e85234f3410c9b20a4f4955a7fef
    138 N45c5a0d71cbd4343b584d84aa1cb1bed
    139 N5f4d2b206a4d4f12bb7a012400537890
    140 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1014593700
    141 https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-7
    142 schema:sdDatePublished 2022-01-01T18:14
    143 schema:sdLicense https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/
    144 schema:sdPublisher Nf342aa09efa142b290ca97a21db673f9
    145 schema:url https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-2-7
    146 sgo:license sg:explorer/license/
    147 sgo:sdDataset articles
    148 rdf:type schema:ScholarlyArticle
    149 N0c71bb1707b44f6885a3964e72dcafd5 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
    150 schema:name Palliative Care
    151 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
    152 N0dc2e85234f3410c9b20a4f4955a7fef schema:name dimensions_id
    153 schema:value pub.1014593700
    154 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
    155 N2fa5ffd393a54d70a7895aaed8e25b3f rdf:first sg:person.0602625725.40
    156 rdf:rest N8b6237af10e54ce6aeddc0ad0a4546e9
    157 N31c431e3dcfe45a9b27d10987d8f6a08 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
    158 schema:name Medical Oncology
    159 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
    160 N45c5a0d71cbd4343b584d84aa1cb1bed schema:name doi
    161 schema:value 10.1186/1477-7525-2-7
    162 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
    163 N4711467298fe4a849984ba3e0c44ab27 rdf:first sg:person.01117144035.36
    164 rdf:rest N2fa5ffd393a54d70a7895aaed8e25b3f
    165 N52aeb99f017845a28582933b8ed8eda0 rdf:first sg:person.01071433302.37
    166 rdf:rest rdf:nil
    167 N5f4d2b206a4d4f12bb7a012400537890 schema:name pubmed_id
    168 schema:value 14741052
    169 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
    170 N8b6237af10e54ce6aeddc0ad0a4546e9 rdf:first sg:person.01226440011.18
    171 rdf:rest N52aeb99f017845a28582933b8ed8eda0
    172 N91043a3bc8c54f28a1a35e01fc96b6db schema:volumeNumber 2
    173 rdf:type schema:PublicationVolume
    174 N97cb288a96e444f1ad5c63bbe1b6c6e0 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
    175 schema:name Humans
    176 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
    177 Nbad9290eeb7f42059286dd9d914b33f3 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
    178 schema:name Bibliometrics
    179 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
    180 Nd0f58c014fd44403a2b98727df3351ba schema:issueNumber 1
    181 rdf:type schema:PublicationIssue
    182 Ne3d97f29579246ffaf1a22617c2ba8d9 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
    183 schema:name Qualitative Research
    184 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
    185 Nf342aa09efa142b290ca97a21db673f9 schema:name Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project
    186 rdf:type schema:Organization
    187 anzsrc-for:11 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
    188 schema:name Medical and Health Sciences
    189 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
    190 anzsrc-for:1117 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
    191 schema:name Public Health and Health Services
    192 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
    193 sg:journal.1031326 schema:issn 1477-7525
    194 schema:name Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
    195 schema:publisher Springer Nature
    196 rdf:type schema:Periodical
    197 sg:person.01071433302.37 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.417893.0
    198 schema:familyName Lina
    199 schema:givenName Micaela
    200 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01071433302.37
    201 rdf:type schema:Person
    202 sg:person.01117144035.36 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.417893.0
    203 schema:familyName Borreani
    204 schema:givenName Claudia
    205 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01117144035.36
    206 rdf:type schema:Person
    207 sg:person.01226440011.18 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.417893.0
    208 schema:familyName Brunelli
    209 schema:givenName Cinzia
    210 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01226440011.18
    211 rdf:type schema:Person
    212 sg:person.0602625725.40 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:None
    213 schema:familyName Miccinesi
    214 schema:givenName Guido
    215 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.0602625725.40
    216 rdf:type schema:Person
    217 sg:pub.10.1007/s005200000226 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1037817208
    218 https://doi.org/10.1007/s005200000226
    219 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
    220 grid-institutes:None schema:alternateName Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Study and Prevention of Cancer, Via di San Salvi 12, 50135 Florence, Italy
    221 schema:name Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Study and Prevention of Cancer, Via di San Salvi 12, 50135 Florence, Italy
    222 rdf:type schema:Organization
    223 grid-institutes:grid.417893.0 schema:alternateName Psychology Unit, National Cancer Institute, Milan, Via Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy
    224 schema:name Psychology Unit, National Cancer Institute, Milan, Via Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy
    225 rdf:type schema:Organization
     




    Preview window. Press ESC to close (or click here)


    ...