Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29987676›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2018

Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care: A Review of the Current Guidelines and Remaining Unmet Needs.

Nhu-Tram A Nguyen, Jolie Ringash

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 78 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Needs assessment in patients surgically treated for head and neck cancer-a randomized controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Long-term outcomes among individuals living with and beyond head and neck cancer: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Physical activity in people affected by head and neck cancers: gender-specific barriers and preferences-ORLAPA survey results.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  8. The citizen perspective on challenges and rehabilitation needs among individuals treated for head and neck cancer: a qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 'Eating with Others': planning, developing and optimising a self-management intervention to promote social eating for patients living with and beyond head and neck cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nhu-Tram A NguyenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and The University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jolie RingashDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and The University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. Jolie.Ringash@rmp.uhn.ca.
Princess Margaret Cancer Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementA larger proportion of patients with head and neck cancers (HNC) are now surviving, constituting up to 3% of all cancer survivors. This is likely due in part to the increase in HPV-related oropharyngeal cancers affecting younger individuals and with a better prognosis and to the improved outcomes of other HNCs as well over the last two decades. Most studies have previously been focusing on improving risk stratification, treatment and disease-related outcomes. Over the last decade, there has been an evolving interest in the field of survivorship care. Despite the collaborative efforts from a multidisciplinary team in managing cancer and treatment-related side-effects and in improving survivors' overall quality of life (QOL), it has been reported that up to 60-65% of patients have at least one unmet need. The purpose of this article is to review current guidelines for HNC survivorship care and identify areas of unmet need. Over the last 5 years, multiple groups have published guidelines describing survivorship care issues and their possible management. Although a very comprehensive and informative first initiative, multiple issues need to be further evaluated. These include how to best support patients and their partners' fear of cancer recurrence, to provide coordinated care among all physicians, to identify and meet patients' needs in local multidisciplinary teams and to institute measures to ensure every individual's access to high-quality patient-centred care. Furthermore, experts may consider engaging in further dialog with primary care physicians (PCP) to improve sharing of survivorship care. More should be learned about PCPs' comfort levels in providing such care and whether further steps are required to facilitate a seamless. Transition of care and accessibility to specialized care as needed.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsPatient CareSurvivorshipHead and Neck NeoplasmsHealth Planning GuidelinesHealth PromotionHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicPublic Health SurveillanceQuality of LifeCancer survivorship careGuidelinesHead-neck neoplasmsSquamous cell carcinomaSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29987676
OpenAlexW2851342260

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.