ArticleBMJ open2015
Insights into the experiences of patients with cancer in London: framework analysis of free-text data from the National Cancer Patient Experience Survey 2012/2013 from the two London Integrated Cancer Systems.
Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surveying patients to assess timeliness of cancer diagnosis.Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Symptom-based staging for logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia.European journal of neurology · 2024Article
- "Provided a window on the world and lessened my feeling of isolation": older adults' perceived COVID-19 impact and technology use in Australia during recurrent lockdowns.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Systematizing Complaints About Healthcare and Services at University Hospitals: Content Analysis of Patient/Family Letters.Journal of patient experience · 2024Article
- Symptom-led staging for semantic and non-fluent/agrammatic variants of primary progressive aphasia.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- Parents Have More to Say: Comments From the Child HCAHPS Single Question Versus a Narrative Item Set.Hospital pediatrics · 2023Article
- Driving resumption after critical illness:A survey and framework analysis of patient experience and process.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2023Article
- Patients' and families' opinions via suggestion boxes for improving hospital care for cancer patients: Analysis of 3419 cases over 11 years.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2022Article
- What Parents have to Say: Content and Actionability of Narrative Comments from Child HCAHPS Survey.Hospital pediatrics · 2022Article
- Exploring patient experiences of cancer care in Northern Ireland: A thematic analysis of free-text responses to the 2018 Northern Ireland Patient Experience Survey (NICPES).BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Computer-assisted textual analysis of free-text comments in the Swiss Cancer Patient Experiences (SCAPE) survey.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- How do patients with malignant brain tumors experience general practice care and support? Qualitative analysis of English Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES) data.Neuro-oncology practice · 2020Article
- The patient experience of ambulatory cancer treatment: a descriptive study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2019Article
- What Words Convey: The Potential for Patient Narratives to Inform Quality Improvement.The Milbank quarterly · 2019Article
- The Challenge of Cancer Pain Assessment.The Ulster medical journal · 2019Article
- Determination of Key Drivers of Patient Experience in a Midsize Pediatric Hematology-Oncology Ambulatory Clinic.Ochsner journal · 2018Article
- Qualitative analysis of 6961 free-text comments from the first National Cancer Patient Experience Survey in Scotland.BMJ open · 2017Article
- Article
- Narrative comments about pediatric inpatient experiences yield substantial information beyond answers to closed-ended CAHPS survey questions.Journal of pediatric nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo shed light on experiences of patients with cancer in London National Health Service (NHS) trusts that may not be fully captured in national survey data, to inform improvement action plans by these trusts.
designFramework analysis of free-text data from 2012/2013 National Cancer Patient Experience Survey (NCPES) from the 2 London Integrated Cancer Systems. SETTING AND
participantsPatients with a cancer diagnosis treated by the NHS across 27 trusts in London.
main outcome measuresFree-text data received from patients categorised into what patients found good about their cancer care and what could be improved.
methodsUsing Framework analysis, a thematic framework was created for 15,403 comments from over 6500 patients. Themes were identified across the London data set, by tumour group and by trust.
resultsTwo-thirds of free-text comments from patients in London were positive and one-third of those related to the good quality of care those patients received. However, the majority of comments for improvement related to quality of care, with a focus on poor care, poor communication and waiting times in outpatient departments. Additionally, 577 patients (9% of those who returned free-text data in London) commented on issues pertaining to the questionnaire itself. Some patients who experienced care from multiple trusts were unclear on how to complete the questionnaire for the single trust whose care they were asked to comment on, others said the questions did not fit their experiences.
conclusionsNCPES free-text analysis can shed light on the experiences of patients that closed questions might not reveal. It further indicates that there are issues with the survey itself, in terms of ambiguities in the questionnaire and difficulties in identifying patients within specific trusts. Both of these issues have the potential to contribute to knowledge and understanding of the uses and limitations of free-text data in improving cancer services.
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.