ArticleBMJ open2013
Readiness for cancer rehabilitation in Denmark: protocol for a cross-sectional mixed methods study.
Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community-based recreational football: a novel approach to promote physical activity and quality of life in prostate cancer survivors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2014Trial
- Impact of an Asian Community-Based Cancer Rehabilitation Program on Health-Related Quality of Life.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRehabilitation is a key element in most cancer care policies in recognition of the often unmet physical, psychological and social needs among the rising numbers of patients with cancer. A systematic assessment of patients' needs and available rehabilitation services constitute the foundation for timely, comprehensive and coordinated cancer rehabilitation. This study aims to provide insight into the current organisation and practice of cancer rehabilitation in Denmark with special emphasis placed on the assessment of patients' needs and availability of services across the cancer treatment trajectory. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cross-sectional design using a mixed methods approach will be used in order to analyse the readiness for cancer rehabilitation in different sectors and from differing perspectives. Substudy 1 consists of an electronic survey among the 98 Danish municipalities and focuses on the availability and use of cancer rehabilitation services for patients with all types of cancers. In substudy 2, a survey among the 19 surgical and 12 oncological departments involved in colorectal cancer treatment in Denmark is conducted in order to describe the current clinical practice regarding the assessment of rehabilitation needs and referral to services. Substudy 3 involves a retrospective clinical audit and semistructured interviews at four randomly selected surgical and oncological departments treating colorectal patients with cancer in order to elucidate current needs assessment practices. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency and will be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration Representatives from municipalities and clinical practice are engaged in the design and execution of the study in order to ensure the usefulness of survey instruments, reflexive interpretation of data and transfer of implications into practice.
resultsPublished in international peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at conferences, seminars and as short reports.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.