Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22035502›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2011

Protocol for the OUTREACH trial: a randomised trial comparing delivery of cancer systemic therapy in three different settings: patient's home, GP surgery and hospital day unit.

Pippa G Corrie, Margaret Moody, Victoria Wood, Linda Bavister, Toby Prevost, Richard A Parker, Ramon Sabes-Figuera, Paul McCrone, Helen Balsdon, Karen McKinnon and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Comparison of chemotherapy treatment administration via venous port and peripheral vascular access in terms of quality of life and costs.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
  4. 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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Pippa G CorrieOncology Centre, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK. pippa.corrie@addenbrookes.nhs.uk
Margaret Moody
Victoria Wood
Linda Bavister
Toby Prevost
Richard A Parker
Ramon Sabes-Figuera
Paul McCrone
Helen Balsdon
Karen McKinnon
Brendan O'Sullivan
Ray S Tan
Stephen Ig Barclay
Addenbrooke's Hospital · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBKing's College London · GBSuffolk University · USWest Suffolk Hospital · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0107-12101
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe national Cancer Reform Strategy recommends delivering care closer to home whenever possible. Cancer drug treatment has traditionally been administered to patients in specialist hospital-based facilities. Technological developments mean that nowadays, most treatment can be delivered in the out-patient setting. Increasing demand, care quality improvements and patient choice have stimulated interest in delivering some treatment to patients in the community, however, formal evaluation of delivering cancer treatment in different community settings is lacking. This randomised trial compares delivery of cancer treatment in the hospital with delivery in two different community settings: the patient's home and general practice (GP) surgeries. METHODS/

designPatients due to receive a minimum 12 week course of standard intravenous cancer treatment at two hospitals in the Anglia Cancer Network are randomised on a 1:1:1 basis to receive treatment in the hospital day unit (control arm), or their own home, or their choice of one of three neighbouring GP surgeries. Overall patient care, treatment prescribing and clinical review is undertaken according to standard local practice. All treatment is dispensed by the local hospital pharmacy and treatment is delivered by the hospital chemotherapy nurses. At four time points during the 12 week study period, information is collected from patients, nursing staff, primary and secondary care teams to address the primary end point, patient-perceived benefits (using the emotional function domain of the EORTC QLQC30 patient questionnaire), as well as secondary end points: patient satisfaction, safety and health economics. DISCUSSION: The Outreach trial is the first randomised controlled trial conducted which compares delivery of out-patient based intravenous cancer treatment in two different community settings with standard hospital based treatment. Results of this study may better inform all key stakeholders regarding potential costs and benefits of transferring clinical services from hospital to the community. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN: ISRCTN66219681.

Indexed as

Day Care, MedicalFamily PracticeHome Care ServicesAdultAgedAntineoplastic AgentsCommunity Health CentersDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansInjections, IntravenousMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPatient SatisfactionProspective StudiesAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID22035502
PMCPMC3214181
OpenAlexW2106007374

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.