ArticleEuropean journal of cancer care2022
'We do need to keep some human touch'-Patient and clinician experiences of ovarian cancer follow-up and the potential for an electronic patient-reported outcome pathway: A qualitative interview study.
Article in European journal of cancer care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Electronic patient-reported monitoring of symptoms during follow-up of ovarian cancer patients: a feasibility study.BMC cancer · 2022Trial
- Benefits and Limitations of Real-World Patient-Reported Toxicity Symptom Monitoring for Guidelines and Care, as Perceived by Patients, Clinicians, and Guideline Developers.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- 'It made me feel part of the team, having my homework to do' - women and specialist nurse experiences of remote follow-up after ovarian cancer treatment: a qualitative interview study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Article
- 'We do need to keep some human touch'-Patient and clinician experiences of ovarian cancer follow-up and the potential for an electronic patient-reported outcome pathway: A qualitative interview study.European journal of cancer care · 2022Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to explore experiences of follow-up after treatment and views on an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) pathway among ovarian cancer patients and clinicians.
methodsSemi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with clinicians and patients previously treated for ovarian cancer. Interviews explored experiences of the current follow-up pathway, patients' needs and views on an ePRO pathway enabling patients to report symptoms online rather than attend clinic-based appointments. Transcripts were analysed using framework analysis.
resultsSixteen patients and 10 clinicians participated from four hospitals in England. Four key themes were identified: transition into follow-up, key features of effective follow-up, issues in follow-up and views of ePRO. Both patients and clinicians saw benefits of an ePRO pathway alongside continued access to specialist support and discussed various practicalities (e.g., frequency, introduction and communication). Technology concerns and feelings of abandonment were highlighted as barriers. The proposed impact on clinical and individual patient outcomes was discussed.
conclusionPatient and clinician views on follow-up and an ePRO pathway informed key recommendations on the development/introduction of ePRO follow-up. Technology use in healthcare will continue to grow and may offer solutions to facilitate responsive and tailored care. Further research should explore the safety, experiences and acceptability of ePRO follow-up.
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.