Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29084595›Full record

Trial reportTrials2017

SCORE: Shared care of Colorectal cancer survivors: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Michael Jefford, Jon Emery, Eva Grunfeld, Andrew Martin, Paula Rodger, Alexandra M Murray, Richard De Abreu Lourenco, Alexander Heriot, Jo Phipps-Nelson, Lisa Guccione and 7 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Facilitators and barriers to shared primary and specialist cancer care: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Acceptability of a shared cancer follow-up model of care between general practitioners and radiation oncologists: A qualitative evaluation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Improved models of care for cancer survivors.Lancet (London, England) · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Shared Care During Breast and Colorectal Cancer Treatment: Is It Associated With Patient-Reported Care Quality?Journal for healthcare quality : official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality
    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

17 authors.

Michael JeffordDepartment of Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Michael.Jefford@petermac.org.
Jon EmeryDepartment of General Practice and Centre for Cancer Research, University of Melbourne, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Eva GrunfeldOntario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Andrew MartinNational Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Paula RodgerDepartment of Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7802-6604
Alexandra M MurrayDepartment of Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Richard De Abreu LourencoCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Alexander HeriotDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Jo Phipps-NelsonDepartment of Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Lisa GuccioneDepartment of Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Dorothy KingDepartment of Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Karolina LisyDepartment of Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Niall TebbuttDepartment of Medical Oncology, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre, Austin Health, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia.
Adele BurgessColorectal Surgery Unit, Austin Health, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia.
Ian FaragherColorectal Surgery, Western Health, Footscray, VIC, Australia.
Rodney WoodsColorectal Surgery Unit, St Vincent's Hospital, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia.
Penelope SchofieldDepartment of Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common cancer affecting both men and women. Survivors of CRC often experience various physical and psychological effects arising from CRC and its treatment. These effects may last for many years and adversely affect QoL, and they may not be adequately addressed by standard specialist-based follow-up. Optimal management of these effects should harness the expertise of both primary care and specialist care. Shared models of care (involving both the patient's primary care physician [PCP] and specialist) have the potential to better support survivors and enhance health system efficiency. METHODS/

designSCORE (Shared care of Colorectal cancer survivors) is a multisite randomised controlled trial designed to optimise and operationalise a shared care model for survivors of CRC, to evaluate the acceptability of the intervention and study processes, and to collect preliminary data regarding the effects of shared care compared with usual care on a range of patient-reported outcomes. The primary outcome is QoL measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are satisfaction with care, unmet needs, continuity of care and health resource use. The shared care model involves replacement of two routine specialist follow-up visits with PCP visits, as well as the provision of a tailored survivorship care plan and a survivorship booklet and DVD for CRC survivors. All consenting patients will be randomised 1:1 to either shared care or usual care and will complete questionnaires at three time points over a 12-month period (baseline and at 6 and 12 months). Health care resource use data will also be collected and used to evaluate costs. DISCUSSION: The evaluation and implementation of models of care that are responsive to the holistic needs of cancer survivors while reducing the burden on acute care settings is an international priority. Shared care between specialists and PCPs has the potential to enhance patient care and outcomes for CRC survivors while offering improvements in health care resource efficiency. If the findings of the present study show that the shared care intervention is acceptable and feasible for CRC survivors, the intervention may be readily expanded to other groups of cancer survivors.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000004369p . Registered on 3 January 2017; protocol version 4 approved 24 February 2017.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedPatient Care TeamQuality of LifeCancer SurvivorsColorectal NeoplasmsContinuity of Patient CareHumansOncologistsPatient SatisfactionPhysicians, Primary CareResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeVictoriaColorectal cancerFollow-upModels of carePrimary careProtocolShared careSurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID29084595
PMCPMC5663101

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.