Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35678264›Full record

ReviewJournal of primary care & community health

Cancer Survivors, Oncology, and Primary Care Perspectives on Survivorship Care: An Integrative Review.

Madeleine Love, Marc Debay, Anne Charity Hudley, Todd Sorsby, Linda Lucero, Stuart Miller, Sagus Sampath, Arya Amini, Dan Raz, Jae Kim and 6 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors.

Madeleine LoveCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5911-2881
Marc DebayUniversity of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA.
Anne Charity HudleyStanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Todd SorsbyPatient Stakeholder, Duarte, CA, USA.
Linda LuceroPatient Stakeholder, Duarte, CA, USA.
Stuart MillerPatient Stakeholder, Duarte, CA, USA.
Sagus SampathCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Arya AminiCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Dan RazCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Jae KimCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Ranjan PathakCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Yi-Jen ChenCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Andreas KaiserCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Kurt MelstromCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Marwan FakihCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.
Virginia SunCity of Hope, Duarte, CA, USA.

Funding

Self-Management to Optimize Survivorship Care and Outcomes in Lung and Colorectal CancerR01CA249501 · NCI · BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE/CITY OF HOPE · PI SUN, VIRGINIA CHIH-YI · 2020 to 2024
$4.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA249501
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEvidence-based models of cancer survivorship care are lacking. Such models should take into account the perspectives of all stakeholders. The purpose of this integrative review is to examine the current state of the literature on cancer survivorship care from the cancer survivor, the oncology care team, and the primary care team perspectives.

methodsUsing defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, we conducted a literature search of PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus databases to identify relevant articles on the stakeholders' perspectives on cancer survivorship care published between 2010 and 2021. We reviewed and abstracted eligible articles to synthesize findings.

resultsA total of 21 studies were included in the review. Barriers to the receipt and provision of cancer survivorship care quality included challenges with communication, cancer care delivery, and knowledge.

conclusionPersistent stakeholder-identified barriers continue to hinder the provision of quality cancer survivorship care. Improved communication, delivery of care, knowledge/information, and resources are needed to improve the quality of survivorship care. Novel models of cancer survivorship care that address the needs of survivors, oncology teams, and PCPs are needed.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsNeoplasmsHumansPrimary Health CareSurvivorsSurvivorshiponcologyprimary careshared caresurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID35678264
PMCPMC9189519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.