Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22067707›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2011

The usefulness and feasibility of a screening instrument to identify psychosocial problems in patients receiving curative radiotherapy: a process evaluation.

Anna P B M Braeken, Gertrudis I J M Kempen, Daniëlle Eekers, Francis C J M van Gils, Ruud M A Houben, Lilian Lechner

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00859768 (The Effectiveness of the Screening Inventory of Psychosocial Problems), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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.

NCT00859768 nacompletednot on this map

The Effectiveness of the Screening Inventory of Psychosocial Problems (SIPP) in Cancer Patients Treated With Radiotherapy.

TypeinterventionalSponsorNetherlands Open UniversityRan2008 to 2010Enrolled568ConditionsBreast Cancer, Lung Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Bladder CancerArmsQuestionnaire administration
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Patient-reported outcome use in oncology: a systematic review of the impact on patient-clinician communication.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Anna P B M BraekenMaastricht University, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Department of Health Services Research, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht, The Netherlands. vivian.braeken@maastro.nl
Gertrudis I J M Kempen
Daniëlle Eekers
Francis C J M van Gils
Ruud M A Houben
Lilian Lechner
Maastro Clinic · NLOpen University of the Netherlands · NLInstituut Verbeeten · NLMaastricht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPsychosocial problems in cancer patients are often unrecognized and untreated due to the low awareness of the existence of these problems or pressures of time. The awareness of the need to identify psychosocial problems in cancer patients is growing and has affected the development of screening instruments. This study explored the usefulness and feasibility of using a screening instrument (SIPP: Screening Inventory of Psychosocial Problems) to identify psychosocial problems in cancer patients receiving curative radiotherapy treatment (RT).

methodsThe study was conducted in a radiation oncology department in The Netherlands. Several methods were used to document the usefulness and feasibility of the SIPP. Data were collected using self-report questionnaires completed by seven radiotherapists and 268 cancer patients.

resultsRegarding the screening procedure 33 patients were offered to consult a psychosocial care provider (e.g. social worker, psychologist) during the first consultation with their radiotherapist. Of these patients, 31 patients suffered from at least sub-clinical symptoms and two patients hardly suffered from any symptoms. Patients' acceptance rate 63.6% (21/33) was high. Patients were positive about the content of the SIPP (mean scores vary from 8.00 to 8.88, out of a range between 0 and 10) and about the importance of discussing items of the SIPP with their radiotherapist (mean score = 7.42). Radiotherapists' perspectives about the contribution of the SIPP to discuss the different psychosocial problems were mixed (mean scores varied from 3.17 to 4.67). Patients were more positive about discussing items of the SIPP if the radiotherapists had positive attitudes towards screening and discussing psychosocial problems.

conclusionsThe screening procedure appeared to be feasible in a radiotherapy department. In general, patients' perspectives were at least moderate. Radiotherapists considered the usefulness and feasibility of the SIPP generally to be lower, but their evaluations were mixed. A positive attitude to using screening instruments like the SIPP needs to be encouraged among radiotherapists, as this may not only improve the usefulness of a screening instrument, but also patients' satisfaction with care.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00859768.

Indexed as

AdultAttitude of Health PersonnelFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNeoplasmsNetherlandsPatient SatisfactionPsychometricsRadiotherapyStress, PsychologicalSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID22067707
PMCPMC3247231
OpenAlexW2083246330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.