ArticlePatient preference and adherence2019
Oncologists' perspectives on adherence/non-adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy and management strategies in women with breast cancer.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy-Specific Perceptions on Response to a Behavioral Intervention for Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy Adherence in Patients With Breast Cancer.JCO oncology practice · 2024Trial
- Patients' Experience of Medication Brand Changes during Hormone Therapy for Breast Cancer-An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Geographic Characteristics of Various Cancers in Yogyakarta Province, Indonesia: A Spatial Analysis at the Community Level.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Article
- Extending Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for 10 Years: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Women's Decision Making in an Online Breast Cancer Forum.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Race and Patient-reported Symptoms in Adherence to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy: A Report from the Women's Hormonal Initiation and Persistence Study.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAdherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) is suboptimal, and a range of variables have been explored for understanding patients' experiences and motivations for medication-taking. However, oncologists' views on adherence are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to explore oncologists' perspectives on adherence/non-adherence and their strategies to ensure patients continue with treatments to inform the development of potential modifiable interventions.
methodsA qualitative study using in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 16 oncologists was conducted in Argentina. A stratified purposive sampling was used to recruit female and male participants from 3 health subsystems (private, social security, and public). Data were analyzed using the Framework approach.
resultsOncologists believed patients' adherence was overall high and associated it with good tolerance of AET in comparison to chemotherapy, information provided, and patients feeling reassured (fear of recurrence). Non-adherence was not perceived as a major source of concern, and it was related to rare cases of severe side effects, young age, refusing treatment, losing the insurance plan, lack of education, and social circumstances. Patients' complaints of bothersome side effects were not identified as a main reason to discontinuation. Public and private sector patients, however, were perceived as having different attitudes toward side effects. Management strategies included medicine change, referral to support services, and a supportive relationship with the oncologist.
conclusionOncologists' perspectives on adherence/non-adherence to AET show similarities and significant differences with those in the literature based on patient-reported factors. Overall adherence was considered high, but the likelihood of unintentional non-adherence seems important in public sector patients. Information to patients should provide clear explanations on both severe and unpleasant side effects. Interventions to improve communication skills in oncologists and specialists responsible for survivorship care should be considered to strengthen patients' self-efficacy and effective medication-taking. Reliable data on adherence are needed.
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.