ArticleEuropean journal of cancer care2019
Using the RE-AIM framework for dissemination and implementation of psychosocial distress screening.
Article in European journal of cancer care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility and Implementation of an Oncology Rehabilitation Triage Clinic: Assessing Rehabilitation, Exercise Need, and Triage Pathways within the Alberta Cancer Exercise-Neuro-Oncology Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Psychological Interventions Prior to Cancer Surgery: a Review of Reviews.Current anesthesiology reports · 2022Review
- Clinical management of emotions in patients with cancer: introducing the approach "emotional support and case finding".Translational behavioral medicine · 2020Article
- Management of Distress in Patients with Cancer-Are We Doing the Right Thing?Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the RE-AIM framework's effect on retention of participants and implementation outcomes of a 5-year cancer research education programme on psychosocial distress screening in cancer centres across the United States.
methodsA one-group pre-/post-test design was used to evaluate the programme on participant retention and implementation outcomes at 6, 12 and 24 months after enrolling in the programme (baseline) and analysed using descriptive statistics.
resultsSeventy-two cancer centres participated in four cohorts. Participant retention was 100%. At baseline and 24 months, respectively, 52 (72%) and 64 (88%) of the cancer centres had formulated a psychosocial distress screening policy; 51 (71%) and 70 (98%) had started screening in more than one clinic/population; 15 (21%) and 45 (63%) had started auditing health records for documentation of screening. Each outcome rate improved at the cancer-centre level over the 24 months.
conclusionRE-AIM can be used as a framework for cancer research education programmes. Future research is needed on the use of a randomised adaptive design to test the optimal support for implementation of quality care standards according to cancer centres' needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.