Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34626251›Full record

ReviewSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2022

COVID-19 recovery: implications for cancer care clinicians.

Clare Delany, Vivienne Milch, Dorothy Keefe, Zee Wan Wong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

4 authors.

Clare DelanyPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan st Parkville, Melbourne, 3010, Australia. c.delany@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6156-2347
Vivienne MilchCancer Australia, Surry Hills, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8834-0349
Dorothy KeefeCancer Australia, Surry Hills, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9377-431X
Zee Wan WongPeninsula Clinical School, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3055-2119

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The wellbeing of clinicians delivering cancer care needs to be considered and included in recovery roadmaps from the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we refer to a report undertaken by Cancer Australia to review and reflect on the impact of COVID-19 in the delivery of cancer care. The report focused on post COVID-19 recovery and asked 3 questions: What changed? What has been the impact of that change? And how can high-value changes be embedded or enhanced? We suggest the same three questions should also be asked of cancer care clinicians. Using the three Cancer Australia questions, we draw from clinicians' insights collected through the Victorian COVID-19 Cancer Network (VCCN) and from the wider health professional literature. We summarise key features of the COVID-19 experience for cancer care clinicians, highlighting moral distress, fatigue and disrupted practice. We then discuss how pandemic-related ethical values might guide health leaders and administrators to balance support for clinician wellbeing with ongoing delivery of cancer care for patients.

Indexed as

COVID-19NeoplasmsHealth PersonnelHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Cancer care cliniciansCOVID-19EthicsRecovery

Identifiers

PMID34626251
PMCPMC8501333

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.