ArticleCancers2021
How Do We Define and Measure Optimal Care for Cancer Survivors? An Online Modified Reactive Delphi Study.
Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of multimodal prehabilitation in breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Pooled it
- Phase III study of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life cancer survivorship core questionnaire.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2023Trial
- Profiling current cancer survivorship practices and enhancing survivorship care in public hospitals in Victoria, Australia.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Article
- Article
- Priority setting for improved leukemia management and research in South Africa: a modified Delphi study.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Understanding experiences of optimal survivorship care: findings from a population-based study of cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Developing national cancer survivorship standards to inform quality of care in the United States using a consensus approach.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2024Article
- The PhenX Toolkit: standard measurement resources for cancer outcomes and survivorship research.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Article
- Effectiveness and implementation of models of cancer survivorship care: an overview of systematic reviews.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2023Review
- Improved models of care for cancer survivors.Lancet (London, England) · 2022Review
- Priority recommendations for the implementation of patient-reported outcomes in clinical cancer care: a Delphi study.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2022Article
- Defining a patient-centered approach to cancer survivorship care: development of the patient centered survivorship care index (PC-SCI).BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Cancer Survivorship Issues: Dissemination and Translation of Evidence-Based Knowledge.Cancers · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This research sought to answer the question 'what quality criteria do survivorship experts consider to be important in achieving optimal cancer survivorship care?'. An online modified reactive Delphi survey consisting of two rounds was completed with experts including consumers, clinicians, researchers, policymakers and quality and accreditation professionals. Survey items were based on international literature and considered three domains: Policy, process and outcome. In round 1 (R1), experts ranked the importance of 68 criteria on a five-point Likert scale. Criteria were retained if scored 4 (important) or 5 (very important) by >75% participants. In round 2 (R2), experts ranked top 10 criteria per domain. Response rates were 79% (70/89) and 84% (76/91), respectively. After R1, six criteria were removed and six were added. From R2, ten items for each domain were retained. These 30 items formed the Quality Framework. A consensus meeting considered priority items from the Quality Framework and feasibility of data collection. Prioritized items included having a policy on survivorship care; the existence of a multidisciplinary survivorship program (policy); appropriate processes to assess survivors' emotional, psychological and physical needs following treatment and stratification to appropriate models of care (process); and collecting patient-reported outcomes, quality of life and survival rates (outcome).
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.