Observational studyIntegrative cancer therapies
A Prospective Outcomes Pilot Evaluation of Inspire Now: A Program for People with Lung Cancer.
Observational study in Integrative cancer therapies. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- "The Ability to Go Out into the World Is the Most Important Thing"-A Qualitative Study of Important Exercise Outcomes for People with Lung Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Mixed methods research in complementary and alternative medicine: a scoping review.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2022Article
- Enhancing Quality of Life in People With Lung Cancer: An Integrative Program of Yoga, Education, and Group Support.Integrative cancer therapiesObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in Canada, yet patients are often under-supported. A six-week program called Inspire Now, created to address unmet supportive care needs, was evaluated in this study. Feasibility and preliminary outcomes were assessed in order to inform future changes to the program.
objectives(1) Assess the feasibility of the program and its evaluation; (2) pilot the collection of patient-reported outcomes; (3) identify outcomes that may be positively influenced; and (4) inform program modifications.
methodsParticipants were recruited from the first session of Inspire Now for an observational pilot study. The primary outcome was feasibility. Secondary outcomes included within-person changes in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Lung (FACT-L) and Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW), and program satisfaction and qualitative experiences of participants and facilitators through internally-developed questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Analysis was primarily descriptive, within person changes in FACT-L and MYCaW were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and qualitative data was assessed for common themes.
resultsThe program and its evaluation were feasible; 8 of 9 (89%) participants consented to the study, median attendance was 6 of 6 sessions (IQR 4.5-6), and questionnaire completion was 100% at baseline and 75% at follow-up. There were clinically meaningful improvements in MYCaW concern 1 (-1.2, 95% CI -2.0 to -0.4) and overall wellbeing (-0.9, 95% CI -2.1 to 0.4). Seven of eight FACT-L sub-sections trended toward improvement, with absolute changes ranging from -1.7 to 10.8%. Participant feedback was overwhelmingly positive; group support and social interactions were highly valued.
conclusionsThe group intervention for people with lung cancer was feasible to both run and evaluate. Participants responded positively to the program. Findings will inform changes to future sessions and an analysis of multiple sessions is planned.
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.