Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20150987›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2010

Facilitating needs based cancer care for people with a chronic disease: Evaluation of an intervention using a multi-centre interrupted time series design.

Amy Waller, Afaf Girgis, Claire Johnson, Geoff Mitchell, Patsy Yates, Linda Kristjanson, Martin Tattersall, Christophe Lecathelinais, David Sibbritt, Brian Kelly and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 92% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Multilevel interventions: measurement and measures.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2012
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Palliative care in australia.Ochsner journal · 2011
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Future of palliative medicine.Indian journal of palliative care
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Amy WallerCentre for Health Research & Psycho-oncology, The Cancer Council NSW, University of Newcastle, Hunter Medical Research Institute & Priority Research Centre in Health Behaviour, Callaghan, Australia.
Afaf Girgis
Claire Johnson
Geoff Mitchell
Patsy Yates
Linda Kristjanson
Martin Tattersall
Christophe Lecathelinais
David Sibbritt
Brian Kelly
Emma Gorton
David Currow
Cancer Council NSW · AUHunter Medical Research Institute · AUUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AUCurtin University · AUFlinders University · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUUniversity of Queensland · AUUniversity of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPalliative care should be provided according to the individual needs of the patient, caregiver and family, so that the type and level of care provided, as well as the setting in which it is delivered, are dependent on the complexity and severity of individual needs, rather than prognosis or diagnosis [1]. This paper presents a study designed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of an intervention to assist in the allocation of palliative care resources according to need, within the context of a population of people with advanced cancer. METHODS/

designPeople with advanced cancer and their caregivers completed bi-monthly telephone interviews over a period of up to 18 months to assess unmet needs, anxiety and depression, quality of life, satisfaction with care and service utilisation. The intervention, introduced after at least two baseline phone interviews, involved a) training medical, nursing and allied health professionals at each recruitment site on the use of the Palliative Care Needs Assessment Guidelines and the Needs Assessment Tool: Progressive Disease - Cancer (NAT: PD-C); b) health professionals completing the NAT: PD-C with participating patients approximately monthly for the rest of the study period. Changes in outcomes will be compared pre-and post-intervention. DISCUSSION: The study will determine whether the routine, systematic and regular use of the Guidelines and NAT: PD-C in a range of clinical settings is a feasible and effective strategy for facilitating the timely provision of needs based care. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ISRCTN21699701.

Identifiers

PMID20150987
PMCPMC2820447
OpenAlexW1491609501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.