Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24661322›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015

Patients' preferences for post-treatment breast cancer follow-up in primary care vs. secondary care: a qualitative study.

Carriene Roorda, Geertruida H de Bock, Christian Scholing, Klaas van der Meer, Marjolein Y Berger, Marlieke de Fouw, Annette J Berendsen

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Acceptability of a shared cancer follow-up model of care between general practitioners and radiation oncologists: A qualitative evaluation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Opt-in or opt-out health-care communication? A cross-sectional study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Perspectives on primary care management of obstructive sleep apnea: a qualitative study of patients and health care providers.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Facilitators of Survivorship Care Among Underserved Breast Cancer Survivors: a Qualitative Study.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2017
    Article
  14. Patient Preferences for Primary Care Provider Roles in Breast Cancer Survivorship Care.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2017
    Article
  15. Involvement of Primary Care Physicians in the Decision Making and Care of Patients With Breast Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2016
    Article
  16. Worry about recurrence in a multi-ethnic population of breast cancer survivors and their partners.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2016
    Article
  17. Survivorship care plans and time since diagnosis: factors that contribute to who breast cancer survivors see for the majority of their care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2015
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carriene RoordaDepartment of General Practice, Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Geertruida H de BockDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Christian ScholingDepartment of General Practice, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Klaas van der MeerDepartment of General Practice, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marjolein Y BergerDepartment of General Practice, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marlieke de FouwDepartment of General Practice, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Annette J BerendsenDepartment of General Practice, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore patients' preferences for follow-up in primary care vs. secondary care.

methodsA cross-sectional design was employed, involving semi-structured interviews with 70 female patients with a history of early-stage breast cancer. Using descriptive content analysis, interview transcripts were analysed independently and thematically by two researchers.

findingsPatients expressed the strongest preference for annual visits (31/68), a schedule with a decreasing frequency over time (27/68), and follow-up > 10 years, including lifelong follow-up (20/64). The majority (56/61) preferred to receive follow-up care from the same care provider over time, for reasons related to a personal doctor-patient relationship and the physician's knowledge of the patient's history. About 75% (43/56) preferred specialist follow-up to other follow-up models. However, primary care-based follow-up would be accepted by 57% (39/68) provided that there is good communication between GPs and specialists, and sufficient knowledge among GPs about follow-up. Perceived benefits of primary care-based follow-up referred to the personal nature of the GP-patient relationship and the easy access to primary care. Perceived barriers included limited oncology knowledge and skills, time available, motivation among GPs to provide follow-up care and patients' confidence with the present specialist follow-up.

conclusionsMore than half of the patients were open to primary care-based follow-up. Patients' confidence with this follow-up model may increase by using survivorship care plans to facilitate communication across the primary/secondary interface and with patients. Training GPs to improve their oncology knowledge and skills might also increase patients' confidence.

Indexed as

Patient PreferencePrimary Health CareAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsContinuity of Patient CareCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInterviews as TopicMedical OncologyMiddle AgedNetherlandsPhysician-Patient Relationsbreast cancerfollow-upinterviewspatients' preferencesprimary carequalitative study

Identifiers

PMID24661322
PMCPMC5810665
OpenAlexW1989899678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.