ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2009
Patients with cancer and e-mail: implications for clinical communication.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Technology use and its association with health and depressive symptoms in older cancer survivors.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018Article
- Why do patients and caregivers seek answers from the Internet and online lung specialists? A qualitative study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2014Article
- Patients' reported reasons for non-use of an internet-based patient-provider communication service: qualitative interview study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2013Article
- The role of the Internet in supporting and informing carers of people with cancer: a literature review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
goals of workThe aim of this study was to collect information about cancer patients' current e-mail use and willingness to communicate with healthcare providers by e-mail. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cohort of 208 patients, undergoing treatment at a comprehensive cancer center in an urban academic medical center in southeastern USA, participated in this descriptive study. An Internet use questionnaire was developed and then used to survey patients with cancer. MAIN
resultsThe majority of patients indicated that e-mail would be a desirable method of clinical communication. A subset of patients would not use e-mail for clinical purposes even if they had access.
conclusionsE-mail communication may be an acceptable form of communication among patients, nurses, and other members of the support team. Because a subset of patients will not use this form of communication, assessment of individual patient preferences for use of e-mail is indicated prior to enrolling them in an e-mail communication program.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19050941What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.