Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27591021›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Exploring experiences of cancer care in Wales: a thematic analysis of free-text responses to the 2013 Wales Cancer Patient Experience Survey (WCPES).

Michael Bracher, Dame Jessica Corner, Richard Wagland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Caring for older adults with cancer in Canada: Views from healthcare providers and cancer care allies in the community.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors.

Michael BracherFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, UK.
Dame Jessica CornerFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, UK.
Richard WaglandFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo provide the first systematic analysis of a national (Wales) sample of free-text comments from patients with cancer, to determine emerging themes and insights regarding experiences of cancer care in Wales.

designThematic analysis of free-text data from a population-based survey. SETTING AND

participantsAdult patients with a confirmed cancer diagnosis treated within a 3-month period during 2012 in the 7 health boards and 1 trust providing cancer care in Wales.

main outcome measuresFree-text categorised by theme, coded as positive or negative, with ratios. Overarching themes are identified incorporating comment categories.

methods4672 respondents (of n=7352 survey respondents) provided free-text comments. Data were coded using a multistage approach: (1) coding of comments into general categories (eg, nursing, surgery, etc), (2) coding of subcategories within main categories (eg, nursing care, nursing communication, etc), (3) cross-sectional analysis to identify themes cutting across categories, (4) mapping of categories/subcategories to corresponding closed questions in the Wales Cancer Patient Experience Survey (WCPES) data for comparison.

resultsMost free-text respondents (82%, n 3818) provided positive comments about their cancer care, with 49% (n=2313) giving a negative comment (ratio 0.6:1, negative-to-positive). 3172 respondents (67.9% of free-text respondents) provided a comment mapping to 1 of 4 overarching themes: communication (n=1673, 35.8% free-text respondents, a ratio of 1.0:1); waiting during the treatment and/or post-treatment phase (n=923, 19.8%, ratio 1.5:1); staffing and resource levels (n=671, 14.4% ratio 5.3:1); speed and quality of diagnostic care (n=374, 8.0%, ratio 1.5:1). Within these areas, constituent subthemes are discussed.

conclusionsThis study presents specific areas of concern for patients with cancer, and reveals a number of themes present across the cancer journey. While the majority of comments were positive, analysis reveals concerns shared by significant numbers of respondents. Timely communication can help to manage these anxieties, even where delays or difficulties in treatment may be encountered.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CarePatient SatisfactionAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsSurveys and QuestionnairesWalescancerfree textoutcomespatient experienceQUALITATIVE RESEARCHwales

Identifiers

PMID27591021
PMCPMC5020838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.