Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32764893›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2020

Optimizing the Communication with Cancer Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Patient Perspectives.

Emad Tashkandi, M BaAbdullah, Ahmed Zeeneldin, A AlAbdulwahab, Omima Elemam, S Elsamany, M Alfayez, Y Dabash, E Khayat, Fayza Hassanin and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. The Effects of COVID-19 on Cancer Care Provision: A Systematic Review.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

12 authors.

Emad TashkandiOncology Center, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-0260-8947
M BaAbdullahInformation Technology, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
Ahmed ZeeneldinOncology Center, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-7284-4320
A AlAbdulwahabOncology Center, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-4893-9514
Omima ElemamOncology Center, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-1576-5877
S ElsamanyOncology Center, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
M AlfayezOncology Center, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
Y DabashPatients Affairs, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
E KhayatPatients Experience, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-2480-7736
Fayza HassaninNursing Administration, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
Rasha AbdulhameedNursing Administration, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
Abdul Rahman JaziehDepartment of Oncology, King Abdulaziz Medical City, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-5465-7698

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring curfew, patients are self-isolated at home and worried. Patient-doctor interactions may be disrupted and therefore need to be replaced by alternative effective communication methods. PURPOSE: To describe the preferences of cancer patients with respect to communication methods and the use of patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs). To record the impact on cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and the knowledge and attitude of the patients towards it. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe created a self-administered electronic survey that was piloted and evaluated for its clinical relevance. Using convenient sampling methods, we surveyed the cancer patients in our Oncology Center.

resultsWe received 385 responses between April 15 and April 30, 2020. The preferred method for communication was a phone call with a 92% response rate followed by the electronic patient portal, mobile application, telemedicine and text message in 75%, 76%, 73%, and 72%, respectively. The majority (97%) preferred the use of PAEHRs for appointments, 95% for drug delivery and to view laboratory tests, and 92% in requesting medical reports. In our survey, 22% of patients with cancer reported that their medical cancer care had not been affected by COVID-19. They reported that trusted sources of information during COVID-19 included the Ministry of Health with 98% and doctors with 94%. Sixty-one percent know that they are more susceptible to COVID-19 infection and 91% of respondents supported the notion of digital transformation in the caring of cancer patients.

conclusionOur study revealed a general acceptance of patients to telecommunication as substitute to in-person interaction with their physicians. Interaction between cancer patients and health care providers should not be disrupted but should be augmented with more effective platforms to improve health care outcomes.

Indexed as

cancerCOVID-19e-healthhealth disparitiespatient online accesspatient preference

Identifiers

PMID32764893
PMCPMC7381793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.