Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35200540›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2022

Models of Follow-Up Care and Secondary Prevention Measures for Survivors of Colorectal Cancer: Evidence-Based Guidelines and Systematic Review.

Jacqueline Galica, Caroline Zwaal, Erin Kennedy, Tim Asmis, Charles Cho, Alexandra Ginty, Anand Govindarajan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Myths and Presumptions About Cancer Survivorship.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Jacqueline GalicaQueen's University Cancer Research Institute, Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3072-2472
Caroline ZwaalProgram in Evidence-Based Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada.
Erin KennedyMount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5, Canada.
Tim AsmisOttawa Hospital Cancer Centre, The Hospital General Campus, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada.
Charles ChoSouthlake Regional Cancer Centre, Newmarket, ON L3Y 2P9, Canada.
Alexandra GintyDorval Medical FHT, Oakville, ON L6K 3W6, Canada.
Anand GovindarajanMount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON M5G 1X5, Canada.
Mount Sinai Hospital · CAMcMaster University · CAOttawa Hospital · CAQueen's University · CASouthlake Regional Health Center · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo provide recommendations for preferred models of follow-up care for stage I-IV colorectal (CRC) cancer survivors in Ontario; to identify signs and symptoms of potential recurrence and when to investigate; and to evaluate patient information and support needs during the post-treatment survivorship period.

methodsConsistent with the Program in Evidence-Based Medicine's standardized approach, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and PROSPERO databases were systematically searched. The authors drafted recommendations and revised them based on the comments from internal and external reviewers.

resultsFour guidelines, three systematic reviews, three randomized controlled trials, and three cohort studies provided evidence to develop recommendations.

conclusionsColorectal cancer follow-up care is complex and requires multidisciplinary, coordinated care delivered by the cancer specialist, primary care provider, and allied health professionals. While there is limited evidence to support a shared care model for follow-up, this approach is deemed to be best suited to meet patient needs; however, the roles and responsibilities of care providers need to be clearly defined, and patients need to know when and how to contact them. Although there is insufficient evidence to recommend any individual or combination of signs or symptoms as strong predictor(s) of recurrence, patients should be educated about these and know which care provider to contact if they develop any new or concerning symptoms. Psychosocial support and empathetic, effective, and coordinated communication are most valued by patients for their post-treatment follow-up care. Continuing professional education should emphasize the importance of communication skills and coordination of communication between the patient, family, and healthcare providers.

Indexed as

AftercareColorectal NeoplasmsCancer SurvivorsHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicSecondary PreventionSurvivorshipSystematic Reviews as Topiccolorectal cancerfollow-upsupport needssurveillancesurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID35200540
PMCPMC8870678
OpenAlexW4205357605

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.