Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28351354›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2017

Case management to increase quality of life after cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial.

Nathalie Scherz, Irène Bachmann-Mettler, Corinne Chmiel, Oliver Senn, Nathalie Boss, Katarina Bardheci, Thomas Rosemann

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Non-medical interventions to enhance return to work for people with cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors.

Nathalie ScherzInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. nathalie.scherz@usz.ch.
Irène Bachmann-MettlerInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Corinne ChmielInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Oliver SennInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Nathalie BossInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Katarina BardheciInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Thomas RosemannInstitute of Primary Care, University of Zurich, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCase management has been shown to be beneficial in phases of cancer screening and treatment. After treatment is completed, patients experience a loss of support due to reduced contact with medical professionals. Case management has the potential to offer continuity of care and ease re-entry to normal life. We therefore aim to investigate the effect of case management on quality of life in early cancer survivors.

methodsBetween 06/2010 and 07/2012, we randomized 95 patients who had just completed cancer treatment in 11 cancer centres in the canton of Zurich, Switzerland. Patients in the case management group met with a case manager at least three times over 12 months. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed after 3, 6 and 12 months using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G) scale, the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) and the Self-Efficacy scale.

resultsThe change in FACT-G over 12 months was significantly greater in the case management group than in the control group (16.2 (SE 2.0) vs. 9.2 (SE 1.5) points, P = 0.006). The PACIC score increased by 0.20 (SE 0.14) in the case management group and decreased by 0.29 (SE 0.12) points in the control group (P = 0.009). Self-Efficacy increased by 3.1 points (SE 0.9) in the case management group and by 0.7 (SE 0.8) points in the control group (P = 0.049).

conclusionsCase management has the potential to improve quality of life, to ease re-entry to normal life and to address needs for continuity of care in early cancer survivors.

trial registrationThe study has been submitted to the ISRCTN register under the name "Case Management in Oncology Rehabilitation" on the 12th of October 2010 and retrospectively registered under the number ISRCTN41474586 on the 24th of November 2010.

Indexed as

Case ManagementPatient Care TeamQuality of LifeFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPatientsPrognosisSelf CareSurvivorsSwitzerlandCancercase managementhealth behaviourquality of lifeself careSelf-Efficacysurvivors

Identifiers

PMID28351354
PMCPMC5368904

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.