Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33275109›Full record

ArticleJMIR cancer2020

The Tablet-Based, Engagement, Assessment, Support, and Sign-Posting (EASSi) Tool for Facilitating and Structuring Sexual Well-Being Conversations in Routine Prostate Cancer Care: Mixed-Methods Study.

Eilís McCaughan, Carrie Flannagan, Kader Parahoo, John Connaghan, Roma Maguire, Mary Steele, Samantha Thompson, Suneil Jain, Michael Kirby, Nuala Brady and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Feasibility and effectiveness of communication tools for addressing intimacy and sexuality in patients with cancer: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Eilís McCaughanInstitute of Nursing & Health Research, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2741-7036
Carrie FlannaganInstitute of Nursing & Health Research, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4454-1007
Kader ParahooInstitute of Nursing & Health Research, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0600-0733
John ConnaghanDepartment of Computing and Information Sciences, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5558-7986
Roma MaguireDepartment of Computing and Information Sciences, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7935-3447
Mary SteeleFaculty of Social and Human Sciences, Centre for Clinical and Community Applications of Health Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2595-3855
Samantha ThompsonUrology Department, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9472-7689
Suneil JainCentre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7429-4791
Michael KirbyFaculty of Health and Human Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5429-7714
Nuala BradyNorthern Heath and Social Care Trust, Antrim, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1037-9937
Seán R O'ConnorCentre for Public Health, Royal Victoria Hospital, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6805-8899
University of Ulster · GBQueen's University Belfast · GBUniversity of Strathclyde · GBNorthern Health and Social Care Trust · GBUniversity of Hertfordshire · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLong-term side-effects associated with different prostate cancer treatment approaches are common. Sexual challenges are the most frequently occurring issues and can result in increased psychological morbidity. It is recognized that barriers to communication can make initiating discussions around sexual concerns in routine practice difficult. Health care professionals need to routinely initiate conversations, effectively engage with patients, and assess needs in order to provide essential support. One proposed method that could support health care professionals to do this involves the use of prompts or structured frameworks to guide conversations.

objectiveThis study aimed to assess feasibility, acceptability, and satisfaction with the tablet-based Engagement, Assessment, Support, and Sign-posting (EASSi) tool designed to facilitate and structure sexual well-being discussions in routine prostate cancer care.

methodsHealth care professionals (n=8) used the EASSi tool during 89 posttreatment appointments. Quantitative data were recorded based on program usage and surveys completed by health care professionals and patients. Qualitative data exploring perceptions on use of the tool were gathered using semistructured interviews with all health care professionals (n=8) and a sample of patients (n=10).

resultsSurveys were completed by health care professionals immediately following each appointment (n=89, 100%). Postal surveys were returned by 59 patients (66%). Health care professionals and patients reported that the tool helped facilitate discussions (81/89, 91% and 50/59, 85%, respectively) and that information provided was relevant (82/89, 92% and 50/59, 85%, respectively). The mean conversation duration was 6.01 minutes (SD 2.91). Qualitative synthesis identified the tool's ability to initiate and structure discussions, improve the "depth" of conversations, and normalize sexual concerns.

conclusionsThe EASSi tool was appropriate and acceptable for use in practice and provided a flexible approach to facilitate routine brief conversations and deliver essential sexual well-being support. Further work will be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of using the tablet-based tool in prostate cancer care settings.

Indexed as

communicationprostate cancerquality of lifesexual well-being

Identifiers

PMID33275109
PMCPMC7748949
OpenAlexW3092286163

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.