ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2023
Follow-up arrangements in head and neck cancer clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from two tertiary UK head and neck cancer centres.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Telemedicine in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: A Narrative Review of Clinical Applications, Outcomes and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this paper is to report the pattern of follow-up that occurred for a cohort of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients across two large centres in the UK (Aintree and Leeds), as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsPatients had been treated for HNC with curative intent between April 2017 and October 2019 by 14 oral and maxillofacial (OMFS) and ear nose and throat (ENT) oncology surgeons in the Patient Concerns Inventory intervention trial. In October 2020, hospital records were reviewed, and information collected on the timing and mode (face-to-face/telephone/video) of follow-up consultations. In addition, recurrence, second primary tumours and deaths were recorded.
resultsAt the start of 'lockdown', 212 members of the cohort were known to be alive. During the post-lockdown period (follow-up appointment data comprised 5 months in Aintree and 7 months in Leeds) 7 died and 13 were identified as palliative/recurrence/new primary/metastases ('new event'). In Aintree, the first ENT/OMFS consultations after lockdown were 51 (67%) telephone and 25 (33%) face-to-face appointments. In Leeds, 46 (78%) consultations were by telephone and 13 (22%) were face-to-face. The second ENT/OMFS consultations post lockdown included 11 (44%) telephone and 14 (56%) face-to-face in Aintree, and 21 (75%) telephone and 7 (25%) face-to-face in Leeds.
conclusionsThese data suggest that clinicians favoured remote consultations. Variations in practice were observed but reached a point of a 'hybrid follow-up approach' that included both face-to-face and remote consultations. With the emergence of telemedicine, clinicians may consider a follow-up model tailored to risk stratification. The development of the mode of such a consultation model needs further evaluation.
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.