Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31005941›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2019

Description of the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort: the evaluation of teenage and young adult cancer services in England.

Rachel M Taylor, Lorna A Fern, Julie Barber, Javier Alvarez-Galvez, Richard Feltbower, Stephen Morris, Louise Hooker, Martin G McCabe, Faith Gibson, Rosalind Raine and 2 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Adolescents and young adults' (AYA) views on their cancer knowledge prior to diagnosis: Findings from a qualitative study involving AYA receiving cancer care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. BRIGHTLIGHT researchers as 'dramaturgs': creatingResearch involvement and engagement · 2020
    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

12 authors.

Rachel M TaylorCancer Clinical Trials, University College Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0853-0925
Lorna A FernDepartment of Oncology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Julie BarberDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.
Javier Alvarez-GalvezDepartment of Biomedicine, Biotechnology and Public Health, University of Cadiz, Cádiz, Spain.
Richard FeltbowerSchool of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Stephen MorrisDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
Louise HookerWessex Teenage and Young Adult Cancer Service, University Hospital Southhamptom, Southampton, UK.
Martin G McCabeDivision of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Faith GibsonORCHID, Great Ormond Street Hospital For Children NHS Trust, London, UK.
Rosalind RaineInstitute of Epidemiology & Health, University College London, London, UK.
Dan P StarkLeeds Insitute of Molecular Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Jeremy S WhelanDepartment of Oncology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6793-5722

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-1209-10013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveInternational recognition of the unique needs of young people with cancer is growing. Many countries have developed specialist age-appropriate cancer services believing them to be of value. In England, 13 specialist principal treatment centres (PTCs) deliver cancer care to young people. Despite this expansion of specialist care, systematic investigation of associated outcomes and costs has, to date, been lacking. The aim of this paper is to describe recruitment and baseline characteristics of the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort and the development of the bespoke measures of levels of care and disease severity, which will inform the evaluation of cancer services in England.

designProspective, longitudinal, observational study.

settingNinety-seven National Health Service hospitals in England.

participantsA total of 1114 participants were recruited and diagnosed between July 2012 and December 2014: 55% (n=618) were men, mean age was 20.1 years (SD=3.3), most (86%) were white and most common diagnoses were lymphoma (31%), germ cell tumour (19%) and leukaemia (13%).

resultsAt diagnosis, median quality of life score was significantly lower than a published control threshold (69.7 points); 40% had borderline to severe anxiety, and 21% had borderline to severe depression. There was minimal variation in other patient-reported outcomes according to age, diagnosis or severity of illness. Survival was lower in the cohort than for young people diagnosed during the same period who were not recruited (cumulative survival probability 4 years after diagnosis: 88% vs 92%).

conclusionsData collection was completed in March 2018. Longitudinal comparisons will determine outcomes and costs associated with access/exposure to PTCs. Findings will inform international intervention and policy initiatives to improve outcomes for young people with cancer.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnxiety DisordersBiomedical ResearchDelivery of Health CareDepressive DisorderHumansMaleNeoplasmsPatient SelectionProspective StudiesQuality of LifeState MedicineSurvival AnalysisYoung Adultbrightlightcancercohortobservational researchrecruitmentteenagers and young adults

Identifiers

PMID31005941
PMCPMC6500338

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.