Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31338642›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2020

Promoting integrated care in prostate cancer through online prostate cancer-specific holistic needs assessment: a feasibility study in primary care.

Amy L Clarke, Julia Roscoe, Rebecca Appleton, Deepak Parashar, Radha Muthuswamy, Omar Khan, Jeremy Dale, Veronica Nanton

Abstract readControlled Clinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Patient-reported outcome measurement implementation in cancer survivors: a systematic review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Health information technology to support cancer survivorship care planning: A systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  7. Moving forward, leaving the patients behind? A multilevel assessment framework for evaluating patient-centred, integrated care quality.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Barriers and facilitators to integrated cancer care between primary and secondary care: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

8 authors.

Amy L ClarkeUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Julia RoscoeUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Rebecca AppletonUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Deepak ParasharStatistics and Epidemiology Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Radha MuthuswamyProstate Cancer UK Information Technology Consultant, London, UK.
Omar KhanUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Jeremy DaleUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Veronica NantonUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, UK. V.nanton@warwick.ac.uk.

Funding

Research for Patient Benefit Programme PB-PG -0214-33092
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study assessed the feasibility of implementing a novel model of integrated prostate cancer care involving an online prostate cancer-specific holistic needs assessment (sHNA) and shared digital communication between patients and their healthcare professionals (HCPs). The sHNA produces a semi-automated care plan that is finalised in consultation between the patient and their practice nurse.

methodsMen living with and beyond prostate cancer were invited to participate in a 9-month non-randomised cluster controlled feasibility study. The intervention group was asked to complete the sHNA on three occasions. Data were collected using Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) at baseline, 10 and 24 weeks, and 9 months. Outcomes included recruitment, retention, acceptability, and engagement with the sHNA and PROMs.

resultsFourteen general practices (8 intervention and 6 control), and 41 men (29 intervention and 12 control) participated. Initial patient engagement with the sHNA was high, with all but one receiving practice nurse-led follow-up and an individualised care plan. The sHNA proved useful in identifying 'red flag' symptoms, and helping practice nurses decide when to seek further medical care for the patients. There was a high level of acceptability for patients and HCPs. However, integration of care did not occur as intended because of problems linking hospital and general practice IT systems.

conclusionWhile the study demonstrated the feasibility of implementing the sHNA, it did not meet the a priori progression criteria; as such, undertaking a definitive randomised controlled trial is not appropriate until the identified methodological and technical issues have been addressed.

Indexed as

Holistic HealthNeeds AssessmentPrimary Health CareTelemedicineAgedAged, 80 and overDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedFeasibility StudiesHealth PersonnelHealth PromotionHumansMaleMiddle AgedOnline SystemsPatient Care PlanningPatient-Centered CareCancer follow-upDigital healthHolistic needs assessmentPrimary careSurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID31338642
PMCPMC7036062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.