Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27900661›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2018

Perceptions of Study Newsletters for Older Cancer Patients in Longitudinal Studies.

Mustafa Mohamedali, Joanna Sandoval, Vikarnan Thiruvarooran, Holly Stacey, Meagan O'Neill, Henriette Breunis, Narhari Timilshina, Sara Durbano, Shabbir M H Alibhai

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. 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

9 authors.

Mustafa MohamedaliDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street Room EN14-214, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Joanna SandovalDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street Room EN14-214, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Vikarnan ThiruvarooranDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street Room EN14-214, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Holly StaceyDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street Room EN14-214, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Meagan O'NeillDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street Room EN14-214, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Henriette BreunisDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street Room EN14-214, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Narhari TimilshinaDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street Room EN14-214, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Sara DurbanoDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street Room EN14-214, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Shabbir M H AlibhaiDepartment of Medicine, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street Room EN14-214, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada. shabbir.alibhai@uhn.ca.

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To date, no study has examined the value of providing study newsletters in educating and motivating participants taking part in longitudinal intervention studies and reducing attrition in studies. The study team examined perceptions and satisfaction towards study newsletters, and their potential benefits, in a population of older men with prostate cancer participating in two ongoing longitudinal trials. Two study newsletters issues were mailed out 4 months apart to prostate cancer patients participating in a bone health and/or exercise intervention trial. Participants (n = 133) were invited to complete an 18-item custom-designed survey examining perceptions towards and satisfaction with the newsletter, and provide feedback about what makes an ideal study newsletter. Analyses were primarily descriptive. Resources required to produce a study newsletter were also calculated. Of 133 participants, 83 usable surveys were returned (response rate 62.4%). The mean satisfaction rating for the newsletter was 8.5/10 (SD 1.9) (10 = highly satisfied). Seventy eight percent said the newsletter encouraged them to continue to participate in the study, and 93% indicated that providing such study newsletters should be optional (64%) or mandatory (29%). Each newsletter required 31 h of study personnel time (mostly research student) to produce. Study participants were very satisfied with the newsletter and the majority indicated that study newsletters should be a regular practice in all long-term studies and may improve participant retention. Producing a newsletter is a low-cost method of educating participants in longitudinal studies. Its impact on recruitment and retention should be examined in clinical trials.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicHealth EducationNeoplasmsPatient ParticipationPeriodicals as TopicAgedAged, 80 and overHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesTeaching MaterialsPatient educationProstate cancerStudy newsletterStudy participants

Identifiers

PMID27900661

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.