Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34063594›Full record

ArticleCancers2021

Using Process Indicators to Monitor Documentation of Patient-Centred Variables in an Integrated Oncology and Palliative Care Pathway-Results from a Cluster Randomized Trial.

Marianne Jensen Hjermstad, Julian Hamfjord, Nina Aass, Olav Dajani, Tonje Lundeby, Torunn Wester, Stein Kaasa

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Balancing ideals and realities: health care professionals' perspectives of and attitudes toward digital patient-centered cancer care.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marianne Jensen HjermstadDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 4950 Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-4834-5898
Julian HamfjordDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 4950 Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8621-2009
Nina AassDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 4950 Oslo, Norway.
Olav DajaniDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 4950 Oslo, Norway.
Tonje LundebyDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 4950 Oslo, Norway.
Torunn WesterDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 4950 Oslo, Norway.
Stein KaasaDepartment of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 4950 Oslo, Norway.
Oslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority - HELSEFORSK 15/00069-99
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite robust evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrating clinical and patient-reported benefits of integrated oncology and palliative care, the tumour-centred focus is predominant. This single-centre process evaluation monitors documentation of required patient-centred variables during an RCT.

methodsPerformance status, patient self-reported symptoms, weight and summaries to general practitioners were assessed from June 2017 to July 2020 in three consultation types: first oncological after study inclusion and palliative and oncological consultations during chemotherapy. Descriptive statistics were used to monitor if the pre-defined program fulfilment of ≥85% documentation was reached.

results435 consultations were monitored in 76 patients; 60.5% males, 86.8% with GI cancers; 76 (17.5%) were from the first oncological consultations, 87 (20.0%) and 272 (62.5%) from palliative or subsequent oncological consultations. Program fulfilment differed across consultation types with 94.8% in the palliative consultations (83.3-100%), relative to 65.8% (62.5-75.0%) and 69.2% (57.0-84.3%) for first and subsequent oncological consultations over time, respectively. Use of self-reported symptoms was consistently lower in the oncological consultations.

conclusionsThe documentation level of required core variables was not satisfactory, notwithstanding their high clinical relevance and continuous reminders during study. Pre-trial optimization strategies are paramount to promote integration and reduce professional and personal barriers towards a more patient-centred focus.

Indexed as

cancerimplementation scienceintegrationpalliative carepatient-centred carepatient pathwayprocess evaluationsymptom controltrials

Identifiers

PMID34063594
PMCPMC8124531
OpenAlexW3159431606

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.