Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29619554›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2018

Examining variation across treatment clinics in cancer patients' psychological outcomes: results of a cross sectional survey.

Mariko Carey, Robert Sanson-Fisher, Tara Clinton-McHarg, Allison Boyes, Ian Olver, Christopher Oldmeadow, Christine Paul, Catherine D'Este, Frans Henskens

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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. Preferences for life expectancy discussions following diagnosis with a life-threatening illness: a discrete choice experiment.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  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.

Mariko CareyPriority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, W4 HMRI Building, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia. Mariko.Carey@newcastle.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0549-1115
Robert Sanson-FisherPriority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, W4 HMRI Building, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Tara Clinton-McHargPriority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, W4 HMRI Building, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Allison BoyesPriority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, W4 HMRI Building, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Ian OlverSamson Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.
Christopher OldmeadowHunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton, NSW, 2305, Australia.
Christine PaulPriority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, W4 HMRI Building, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Catherine D'EsteNational Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Research School of Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Frans HenskensSchool of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.

Funding

Cancer Council NSW CSR11-02National Health and Medical Research Council 1010536
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe majority of research on psychological outcomes for cancer patients has focussed on the role of individual characteristics, and disease and treatment factors. There has been very little exploration of the potential contribution of the treatment clinic to these outcomes. This study explored whether there is variation among clinics in cancer patients' psychological outcomes.

methodsCancer outpatients were recruited from 22 medical oncology and haematology clinics in Australia. Participants completed a pen and paper survey including the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), as well as sociodemographic, disease and treatment characteristics.

resultsOf those eligible to participate, 4233 (82%) consented and 2811 (81% of consenters) returned the completed survey. There was no statistically significant variation in HADS depression scores across clinics. Some difference in anxiety scores derived from the HADS questionnaire between clinics (p = 0.03) was found with the percentage of between-clinic variation estimated to be 1.11%. However, once all demographic, disease and treatment predictors were adjusted for there was no statistical differences between clinics (percent of between-clinic variation = 0.53%; p = 0.1415).

conclusionsPsychological outcomes were not found to vary between clinics. Other sources of variation including patient characteristics may over-ride between-clinic variability, if it exists.

Indexed as

AdultAmbulatory Care FacilitiesAnxietyCross-Sectional StudiesDepressionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeAnxietyCancerDepressionOncologyPsychologicalQuality of care

Identifiers

PMID29619554
PMCPMC6096527

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.