Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26111955›Full record

Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2016

Improving psychosocial outcomes for caregivers of people with poor prognosis gastrointestinal cancers: a randomized controlled trial (Family Connect).

Joanne M Shaw, Jane M Young, Phyllis N Butow, Tim Badgery-Parker, Ivana Durcinoska, James D Harrison, Patricia M Davidson, David Martin, Charbel Sandroussi, Michael Hollands and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Effect of Psychosocial Interventions on Cancer's Caregiver Quality of Life: Meta-analysis.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. What are the sources of distress in a range of cancer caregivers? A qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  16. Global advances in health and medicine · 2021
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Preventing emergency department visits among patients with cancer: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    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

15 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Joanne M ShawPsycho-oncology Co-operative Research Group, School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Level 6 Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. joanne.shaw@sydney.edu.au.
Jane M YoungSchool of Public Health,, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Phyllis N ButowPsycho-oncology Co-operative Research Group, School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Level 6 Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Tim Badgery-ParkerSchool of Public Health,, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Ivana DurcinoskaSchool of Public Health,, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
James D HarrisonUniversity of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Patricia M DavidsonUniversity of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
David MartinRoyal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney Local Health District, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Charbel SandroussiSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Michael HollandsWestmead Hospital, Western Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
David JosephRoyal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney Local Health District, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Amitabha DasBankstown-Lidcome Hospital, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Bankstown, NSW, Australia.
Vincent LamSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Emma JohnstonSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Michael J SolomonSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Sydney Local Health District · AUThe University of Sydney · AUBankstown Lidcombe Hospital · AUChris O’Brien Lifehouse · AURoyal Prince Alfred Hospital · AUUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study investigated the effectiveness of a structured telephone intervention for caregivers of people diagnosed with poor prognosis gastrointestinal cancer to improve psychosocial outcomes for both caregivers and patients.

methodsCaregivers of patients starting treatment for upper gastrointestinal or Dukes D colorectal cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to the Family Connect telephone intervention or usual care. Caregivers in the intervention group received four standardized telephone calls in the 10 weeks following patient hospital discharge. Caregivers' quality of life (QOL), caregiver burden, unmet supportive care needs and distress were assessed at 3 and 6 months. Patients' QOL, unmet supportive care needs, distress and health service utilization were also assessed at these time points.

resultsCaregivers (128) were randomized to intervention or usual care groups. At 3 months, caregiver QOL scores and other caregiver-reported outcomes were similar in both groups. Intervention group participants experienced a greater sense of social support (p = .049) and reduced worry about finances (p = .014). Patients whose caregiver was randomized to the intervention also had fewer emergency department presentations and unplanned hospital readmissions at 3 months post-discharge (total 17 vs. 5, p = .01).

conclusionsThis standardized intervention did not demonstrate any significant improvements in caregiver well-being but did result in a decrease in patient emergency department presentations and unplanned hospital readmissions in the immediate post-discharge period. The trend towards improvements in a number of caregiver outcomes and the improvement in health service utilization support further development of telephone-based caregiver-focused supportive care interventions.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalSocial SupportAgedCaregiversFemaleGastrointestinal NeoplasmsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient ReadmissionPrognosisQuality of LifeTelephoneCaregiversGastrointestinal cancerQuality of lifeRandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID26111955
OpenAlexW925770218

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.