ArticleJCO oncology practice2020
Patient Perspectives on the Implementation of Risk-Aligned Bladder Cancer Surveillance: Systematic Evaluation Using the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases Framework.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2020. 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.
- Towards an Integrated Framework for Health Surveillance Systems: A Systematic Literature Review of Design Components and Implementation Challenges.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Determinants of Risk-Aligned Bladder Cancer Surveillance-Mixed-Methods Evaluation Using the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases Framework.JCO oncology practice · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMany patients living with bladder cancer do not undergo surveillance that is aligned with their risk for recurrence or progression, which exposes them to unnecessary risk and burden of procedures. To implement risk-aligned surveillance as recommended by multiple guidelines, we need to understand patient-, provider-, and system-level factors contributing to the delivery of risk-aligned surveillance. In this study, we sought to systematically assess patient-level factors. PARTICIPANTS AND
methodsGuided by the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases framework, we conducted semistructured interviews with 22 patients with bladder cancer undergoing surveillance cystoscopy procedures at three facilities within the Department of Veterans Affairs. Patients were sampled using quantitative data on bladder cancer risk category (low
resultsParticipants included seven low-risk and 15 high-risk patients; 10 underwent risk-aligned surveillance and 12 did not. In mixed-methods analyses, perception of risk appropriately differed by risk but not by surveillance category. Participants understood the recommended surveillance schedule according to their risk category. Participants emphatically expressed that adhering to providers' recommendations is prudent; intentions to adhere did not vary across risk and surveillance categories.
conclusionParticipants intended to adhere to providers' recommendations and strongly endorsed the importance of adherence. These findings suggest implementation strategies to improve risk-aligned surveillance may be most effective when targeting provider- and system-level factors rather than patient-level factors.
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.