Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22048032›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2011

A qualitative study of unmet needs and interactions with primary care among cancer survivors.

N F Khan, J Evans, P W Rose

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The role of the GP in follow-up cancer care: a systematic literature review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2016
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Acceptability and Feasibility of Survivorship Group Medical Visits for Breast Cancer Survivors in a Safety Net Hospital.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Exploring the experiences of patients, general practitioners and oncologists of prostate cancer follow-up: A qualitative interview study.European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Survivorship, Version 2.2019.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2019
    Article
  20. Experiences with late effects-related care and preferences for long-term follow-up care among adult survivors of childhood lymphoma.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

N F KhanDepartment of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford, 23-38 Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford, UK. nada.khan@phc.ox.ac.uk
J Evans
P W Rose
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK C23140/A8854
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite increasing numbers, there is little research investigating the long-term needs of cancer survivors. The aim of this study is to explore the experiences of individuals who have survived at least 5 years following a cancer diagnosis, and to describe perceived unmet needs and interactions with primary care.

methodsForty long-term survivors of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer were purposively selected for an in-depth qualitative study. We aimed for a maximum variation sample according to cancer site, gender, time since diagnosis, cancer needs, anxiety and depression. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded thematically using a grounded theory approach.

resultsAnalysis of the interview data is presented in four subthemes: the role they perceived for the general practitioner (GP), unmet needs, reasons for not using primary care for needs they perceived as cancer related, and ongoing care for cancer-related issues. The majority of cancer survivors did not see a role for their GP in their long-term care related to their cancer diagnosis as most considered that they did not need active follow-up, but some expressed a need for psychological services and information on possible long-term effects. Cancer survivors cited three main reasons for not using GP services in relation to their cancer diagnosis: GPs were seen as non-experts in cancer; they were perceived as too busy; and a lack of continuity within primary care made it difficult to talk about long-term issues. There was a wide variation in schedules and notification of PSA tests among the prostate cancer survivors. DISCUSSION: The results from this project suggest that some cancer survivors have specific emotional and physical needs that could benefit from input from their primary care team, but not all cancer survivors look to their GP for their long-term cancer-related care. Better information care planning is required from specialists in order to identify those who would benefit most.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPrimary Health CareQuality of LifeSurvivors

Identifiers

PMID22048032
PMCPMC3251949
OpenAlexW2003179365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.