Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32157608›Full record

Trial reportJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2020

A telephone-based education and support intervention for Rural Breast Cancer Survivors: a randomized controlled trial comparing two implementation strategies in rural Florida.

Karen Meneses, Maria Pisu, Andres Azuero, Rachel Benz, Xiaogang Su, Patrick McNees

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Health-related quality of life in rural cancer survivors compared with their urban counterparts: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karen MenesesSchool of Nursing, Office of Research and Scholarship, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Maria PisuO'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. mpisu@uab.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9329-3268
Andres AzueroSchool of Nursing, Office of Research and Scholarship, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Rachel BenzSchool of Nursing, Office of Research and Scholarship, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Xiaogang SuDepartment of Mathematical Sciences, The University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX, USA.
Patrick McNeesSchool of Health Professions, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
University of Alabama at Birmingham · USThe University of Texas at El Paso · US

Funding

Rural Breast Cancer Survivors InterventionR01CA120638 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI MENESES, KAREN M · 2007 to 2012
$2.8M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA120638
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare two implementation telephone-based strategies of an evidence-based educational and support intervention to Rural Breast Cancer Survivors (RBCS) in which education was delivered early or after the support component.

methodsFlorida RBCS participated in a 12-month randomized clinical trial (RCT) with two arms: Early Education and Support (EE-S) and Support and Delayed Education (S-DE). Arms differed in the timing of 6 support and 3 education sessions. Main outcome was quality of life (QOL, SF-36 physical and mental composite scores [PCS, MCS]). Secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms (Centers for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, CES-D), mood (Profile of Mood States, POMS), and social support (Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey, MOS-SSS). Outcomes were analyzed longitudinally using repeated measures models fitted with linear mixed methods.

resultsOf 432 RBCS (mean 25.6 months from diagnosis), about 48% were 65+, 73% married/partnered, and 28% with ≤high school education. There were no differences between EE-S and S-DE in demographics or outcomes at baseline (mean (standard deviation): SF-36 PCS, 44.88 (10.6) vs. 45.08 (10.6); MCS, 49.45 (11.1) vs. 48.1 (11.9); CES-D, 10.11 (9.8) vs. 10.86 (10.5); POMS-SF, 23.95 (38.6) vs. 26.35 (38.8); MOS-SSS, 79.2 (21.2) vs. 78.66 (21.2)) or over time. One exception was slightly worse mean scores at month 9 in MCS (Cohen's d, - 0.22; 95% CI, - 0.38, - 0.06) and POMS (Cohen's d, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.07, 0.39) for EE-S vs. S-DE.

conclusionsThe implementation strategies were equivalent. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Enhancing support may be considered before delivering not-in-person interventions to RBCS.

Indexed as

AgedBreast NeoplasmsFemaleFloridaHumansQuality of LifeRural PopulationSocial SupportTelephoneBreast cancerCancer survivorshipImplementationNeoplasmQuality of lifeRural health

Identifiers

PMID32157608
PMCPMC7365751
OpenAlexW3012264225

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.