Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28213599›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Health information needs, source preferences and engagement behaviours of women with metastatic breast cancer across the care continuum: protocol for a scoping review.

Carol A Tucker, M Pilar Martin, Ray B Jones

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Peer support opportunities across the cancer care continuum: a systematic scoping review of recent peer-reviewed literature.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019
    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.

Carol A TuckerFaculty of Health & Human Sciences, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK.
M Pilar MartinAdelphi University College of Nursing and Public Health, Garden City, New York, USA.
Ray B JonesFaculty of Health & Human Sciences, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe health information needs, information source preferences and engagement behaviours of women with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) depend on personal characteristics such as education level, prior knowledge, clinical complications, comorbidities and where they are in the cancer journey. A thorough understanding of the information behaviours of women living with mBC is essential to the provision of optimal care. A preliminary literature review suggests that there is little research on this topic, but that there may be lessons from a slightly broader literature. This review will identify what is known and what is not known about the health information needs, acquisition and influences of women with mBC across the care continuum. Findings will help to identify research needs and specific areas where in-depth systematic reviews may be feasible, as well as inform evidence-based interventions to address the health information needs of female patients with mBC with different demographics and characteristics and across the mBC journey. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A scoping review will be performed using the guidelines of Arksey and O'Malley as updated by subsequent authors to systematically search scientific and grey literature for articles in English that discuss the health information needs, source preferences, engagement styles, and associated personal and medical attributes of women ≥18 years living with mBC at different stages of the disease course. A variety of databases (including Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Academic Search Premier, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, and PQDT Open), oncology, patient advocacy and governmental websites will be searched from inception to present day. Research and non-research literature will be included; no study designs will be excluded. The six-stage Arksey and O'Malley scoping review methodological framework involves: (1) identifying the research question; (2) searching for relevant studies; (3) selecting studies; (4) charting the data; (5) collating, summarising and reporting the results; and (6) consulting with stakeholders to inform or validate study findings (optional). Data will be extracted and analysed using a thematic chart and descriptive content analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Being a secondary analysis, this research will not require ethics approval. Results will be disseminated through patient support organisations and websites and publications targeting healthcare professionals, advocates and patients.

Indexed as

Consumer Health InformationInformation Seeking BehaviorAge FactorsBreast NeoplasmsDatabases, BibliographicEducational StatusEthnicityFemaleHumansNeeds AssessmentNeoplasm MetastasisResearch DesignScoping Reviews as Topiccare continuumHealth information needsmetastatic breast cancerscoping reviewtailored information

Identifiers

PMID28213599
PMCPMC5318560

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.