Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31265350›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology practice2019

Has the Quality of Patient-Provider Communication About Survivorship Care Improved?

Ashish Rai, Neetu Chawla, Xuesong Han, Sun Hee Rim, Tenbroeck Smith, Janet de Moor, Karen R Yabroff

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Understanding experiences of optimal survivorship care: findings from a population-based study of cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  2. Do discussions of financial burdens decrease long-term financial toxicity in adolescent and young adult cancer survivors?Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
  3. Provision of Lifestyle Recommendations to Cancer Patients: Results of a Nationally Representative Survey of Hematologists/Oncologists.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ashish RaiAmerican Cancer Society, Framingham, MA.
Neetu ChawlaVeterans Health Administration, Los Angeles, CA.
Xuesong HanAmerican Cancer Society, Framingham, MA.
Sun Hee RimCenters for Disease Prevention and Control, Atlanta, GA.
Tenbroeck SmithAmerican Cancer Society, Framingham, MA.
Janet de MoorNational Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Karen R YabroffAmerican Cancer Society, Framingham, MA.
American Cancer Society · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USNational Cancer Institute · USUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of the current study was to assess whether the quality of patient-provider communication on key elements of cancer survivorship care changed between 2011 and 2016.

methodsParticipating survivors completed the 2011 or 2016 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Experiences with Cancer Surveys (N = 2,266). Participants reported whether any clinician ever discussed different aspects of survivorship care. Responses ranged from "Did not discuss at all" to "Discussed it with me in detail". Distributions of responses were compared among all respondents and only among those who had received cancer-directed treatment within 3 years of the survey.

resultsIn 2011, the percentage of survivors who did not receive detailed instructions on follow-up care, late or long-term adverse effects, lifestyle recommendations, and emotional or social needs were 35.1% (95% CI, 31.9% to 38.4%), 54.2% (95% CI, 50.7% to 57.6%), 58.9% (95% CI, 55.3% to 62.5%), and 69.2% (95% CI, 65.9% to 72.3%), respectively, and the corresponding proportions for 2016 were 35.4% (95% CI, 31.9% to 37.8%), 55.5% (95% CI, 51.7% to 59.3%), 57.8% (95% CI, 54.2% to 61.2%), and 68.2% (95% CI, 64.3% to 71.8%), respectively. Findings were similar among recently treated respondents. Only 24% in 2011 and 22% in 2016 reported having detailed discussions about all four topics. In 2016, 47.6% of patients (95% CI, 43.8% to 51.4%) reported not having detailed discussions with their providers about a summary of their cancer treatments.

conclusionClear gaps in the quality of communication between survivors of cancer and providers persist. Our results highlight the need for continued efforts to improve communication between survivors of cancer and providers, including targeted interventions in key survivorship care areas.

Indexed as

CommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsSurvivorshipAdolescentAdultAftercareAgedAged, 80 and overCancer SurvivorsDelivery of Health CareFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInformation DisseminationLife Style

Identifiers

PMID31265350
PMCPMC6851794
OpenAlexW2953776198

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.