Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35726108›Full record

Observational studySupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2022

Addressing colon cancer patients' needs during follow-up consultations at the outpatient clinic: a multicenter qualitative observational study.

Julien A M Vos, Laura A M Duineveld, Vera E van Miltenburg, Inge Henselmans, Henk C P M van Weert, Kristel M van Asselt

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Exploring Communication Dynamics Between Patients and Healthcare Providers in Oncology: A Systematic Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julien A M VosDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. j.a.m.vos@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3383-8171
Laura A M DuineveldDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Vera E van MiltenburgDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Inge HenselmansDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Henk C P M van WeertDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Kristel M van AsseltDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLDutch Cancer Society · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo describe colon cancer patients' needs and how healthcare providers respond to these needs during routine follow-up consultations in hospital.

methodsA multicenter qualitative observational study, consisting of follow-up consultations by surgeons and specialized oncology nurses. Consultations were analyzed according to Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences. Patients' questions, cues, and concerns were derived from the data and categorized into supportive care domains. Responses of healthcare providers were defined as providing or reducing space for disclosure. Patient satisfaction with care was measured with a short questionnaire.

resultsConsultations with 30 patients were observed. Questions typically centered around the health system and information domain (i.e., follow-up schedule and test results; 92%). Cues and concerns were mostly associated with the physical and daily living domain (i.e., experiencing symptoms and difficulties resuming daily routine; 43%), followed by health system and information (i.e., miscommunication or lack of clarity about follow-up; 28%), and psychological domain (i.e., fear of recurrence and complications; 28%). Problems in the sexuality domain hardly ever arose (0%). Healthcare providers provided space to talk about half of the cues and concerns (54%). Responses to cancer-related versus unrelated problems were similar. Overall, the patients were satisfied with the information and communication received.

conclusionsColon cancer patients express various needs during consultations. Healthcare providers respond to different types of needs in a similar fashion. We encourage clinicians to discuss all supportive care domains, including sexuality, and provide space for further disclosure. General practitioners are trained to provide holistic care and could play a greater role.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsCommunicationAmbulatory Care FacilitiesFollow-Up StudiesHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsReferral and ConsultationAftercareCancer follow-upColonic neoplasmsObservationQualitative researchSurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID35726108
PMCPMC9512715
OpenAlexW4283212994

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.