Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33220715›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2020

Assessing suitability for long-term colorectal cancer shared care: a scenario-based qualitative study.

Kylie Vuong, Kerry Uebel, Maria Agaliotis, Stella Jun, Jane Taggart, Sue Suchy, Winston Liauw, Melvin Chin, Kate Webber, Mark Harris

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Acceptability of a shared cancer follow-up model of care between general practitioners and radiation oncologists: A qualitative evaluation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  5. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kylie VuongSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. kylie.vuong@unsw.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-2671-9473
Kerry UebelSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Maria AgaliotisAustralian Institute of Health Service Management, University of Tasmania, Sydney, Australia.
Stella JunTranslational Cancer Research Network, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Jane TaggartSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Sue SuchyTranslational Cancer Research Network, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Winston LiauwSaint George and Sutherland Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Melvin ChinPrince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Kate WebberSchool of Clinical Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
Mark HarrisSchool of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AUAustralian Institute of Health and Welfare · AUMonash Health · AUSutherland Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShared care is the preferred model for long-term survivorship care by cancer survivors, general practitioners and specialists. However, survivorship care remains specialist-led. A risk-stratified approach has been proposed to select suitable patients for long-term shared care after survivors have completed adjuvant cancer treatment. This study aims to use patient scenarios to explore views on patient suitability for long-term colorectal cancer shared care across the risk spectrum from survivors, general practitioners and specialists.

methodsParticipants completed a brief questionnaire assessing demographics and clinical issues before a semi-structured in-depth interview. The interviews focused on the participant's view on suitability for long term cancer shared care, challenges and facilitators in delivering it and resources that would be helpful. We conducted thematic analysis using an inductive approach to discover new concepts and themes.

resultsInterviews were conducted with 10 cancer survivors, 6 general practitioners and 9 cancer specialists. The main themes that emerged were patient-centredness, team resilience underlined by mutual trust and stronger system supports by way of cancer-specific training, survivorship care protocols, shared information systems, care coordination and navigational supports.

conclusionsDecisions on the appropriateness of this model for patients need to be made collaboratively with cancer survivors, considering their trust and relationship with their general practitioners and the support they need. Further research on improving mutual trust and operationalising support systems would assist in the integration of shared survivorship care.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsColorectal NeoplasmsGeneral PractitionersHumansQualitative ResearchSurvivorshipCapacity buildingColorectal neoplasmsHealth communicationHealth servicesPrimary health careSurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID33220715
PMCPMC7680065
OpenAlexW3109435740

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.