ArticleInternational journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being2022
Care coordination, consistency and continuity: the case of the key worker role in children's cancer care.
Article in International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing oncology care excellence through timely, multidisciplinary-navigation models for non-palliative breast and colorectal cancer.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026Article
- [From text to scene: legal devices and care trajectories in the adoption of children with disabilities].Cadernos de saude publica · 2026Article
- End of life care in paediatric settings: UK national survey.BMJ supportive & palliative care · 2025Article
- Health-illness transition processes in children with complex chronic conditions and their parents: a scoping review.BMC pediatrics · 2024Article
- Development of an intravenous chemotherapy intervention for children and adolescents with cancer administered by their parents at home (INTACTatHome).BMC health services research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe overall aim was to evaluate the key worker role across principal treatment centres for children with cancer in England, Wales and Scotland.
methodsMixed-methods case study gathering data from multiple perspectives using questionnaires, interviews, focus groups and reports/performance documents over a two-year period. Framework approach was adopted to analyse transcripts and documentary data.
resultsParticipants included: 22 nurse specialist key workers, 103 parents, 85 professionals and 10 children/young people. Qualitative and quantitative data were woven together, to best illuminate key worker services. Four main models of care were described as well as the context of care and process of care. Key working effectiveness centred around three pillars: care coordination; expert knowledge, experience and expertise; relationship. These were essential to improved family experience, emotional wellbeing, and delivery of individualized care closer to home.
conclusionsThe role is complex and diverse, responding to local needs. Certain conditions, (e.g., high caseload) placed limits on enacting the three pillars, diminishing the positive experience of families. When they worked well, key workers reduced the fragmented nature of services and families placed great value on keeping the same key worker from diagnosis into long-term care. Retaining these roles, where already in place, or including, if not, we would recommend, factoring into budgets to sustain and expand such roles.
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.