| Methods |
Cohort
Retrospective
Cross‐sectional. |
| Participants |
110 patients (65 men, 45 women), 38 APE, 72 AR.
Postal survey of surviving patients who had received surgery for rectal cancer between 1978 and 1997. Respons rate 67,1%.
Japan. |
| Interventions |
Quality of life assessment with EuroQol. |
| Outcomes |
Quality of life. |
| Notes |
Evidence level: 2B.
Not stated: Tumour distance from anal verge, level of anastomosis in AR group, pouch AR group, radio/chemotherapy. |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
High risk |
Retrospective, cross‐sectional cohort study. Patients identified from Kananga Cancer Registry were invited to participate. Not all eligible patients responded to questionnaire. |
| Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
Anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection |
High risk |
Blinding not possible due to surgical therapy. |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
Quality of life |
Low risk |
All included patients completed the study. |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
All QoL data reported. |
