Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27116014›Full record

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

Cancer-related fatigue: appraising evidence-based guidelines for screening, assessment and management.

Elizabeth J M Pearson, Meg E Morris, Carol E McKinstry

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A perfect storm and patient-provider breakdown in communication: two mechanisms underlying practice gaps in cancer-related fatigue guidelines implementation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

3 authors.

Elizabeth J M PearsonRural Health School, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia. elizabeth.jm.pearson@gmail.com.
Meg E MorrisSchool of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Carol E McKinstryRural Health School, La Trobe University, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere is inconsistent management of cancer-related fatigue (CRF) by health professionals worldwide. This research aims to identify the most appropriate guidelines for the management of cancer-related fatigue.

methodsA systematic search of international literature identified evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for CRF. Four reviewers independently appraised the highest quality guidelines using the AGREE-II instrument and National Heath and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) guideline standards.

resultsFive guidelines met the inclusion criteria. Of these, the 2015 Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology (CAPO) CRF guidelines and the 2014 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) fatigue guidelines for cancer survivors were selected for in-depth appraisal. The CAPO guideline scored higher than the ASCO for five domains of the AGREE-II. For one domain, the differences were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). The CAPO guideline met 37 of 47 NHMRC mandatory guideline standards and the ASCO guideline met 20. The difference in the proportion of standards met was statistically significant for one domain (p ≤ 0.05). Both guidelines had low scores for applicability and implementation.

conclusionsCurrently, the CAPO guideline for cancer-related fatigue has the strongest evidence for use. To enhance implementation, further strategies for guideline dissemination and application are needed.

Indexed as

FatigueHealth Planning GuidelinesHumansMass ScreeningNeoplasmsSurvivorsAGREE-IICancer-related fatigueClinical guidelineCritical appraisalNHMRC guideline standard

Identifiers

PMID27116014

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.