ArticleJAMIA open2022
Enhancing cancer prevention and survivorship care with a videoconferencing model for continuing education: a mixed-methods study to identify barriers and incentives to participation.
Article in JAMIA open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Role of digital health in coordinating patient care in a hub-and-spoke hierarchy of cancer care facilities: a scoping review.Ecancermedicalscience · 2023Article
- An evaluation of an Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) intervention in cancer prevention and survivorship care.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo enhance cancer prevention and survivorship care by local health care providers, a school of public health introduced an innovative telelearning continuing education program using the Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) model. In ECHO's hub and spoke structure, synchronous videoconferencing connects frontline health professionals at various locations ("spokes") with experts at the facilitation center ("hub"). Sessions include experts' didactic presentations and case discussions led by spoke site participants. The objective of this study was to gain a better understanding of the reasons individuals choose or decline to participate in the Cancer ECHO program and to identify incentives and barriers to doing so. MATERIALS AND
methodsStudy participants were recruited from the hub team, spoke site participants, and providers who attended another ECHO program but not this one. Participants chose to take a survey or be interviewed. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided qualitative data coding and analysis.
resultsWe conducted 22 semistructured interviews and collected 30 surveys. Incentives identified included the program's high-quality design, supportive learning climate, and access to information. Barriers included a lack of external incentives to participate and limited time available. Participants wanted more adaptability in program timing to fit providers' busy schedules.
conclusionAlthough the merits of the Cancer ECHO program were widely acknowledged, adaptations to facilitate participation and emphasize the program's benefits may help overcome barriers to attending. As the number of telelearning programs grows, the results of this study point to ways to expand participation and spread health benefits more widely.
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.