Trial reportCancer research and treatment2023
Effectiveness of Self-Assessment, TAilored Information, and Lifestyle Management for Cancer Patients' Returning to Work (START): A Multi-center, Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Cancer research and treatment, 2023. 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.
- Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Return to Work and Multidimensional Health-Related Quality of Life in Adults with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Trials.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Trajectories of care dependency and predictors following laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a longitudinal study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Supporting Life Adjustment in Patients With Lung Cancer Through a Comprehensive Care Program: Protocol for a Controlled Before-and-After Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe developed a comprehensive return to work (RTW) intervention covering physical, psycho-social and practical issues for patients newly diagnosed and evaluated its efficacy in terms of RTW. Materials and Methods: A multi-center randomized controlled trial was done to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention conducted at two university-based cancer centers in Korea. The intervention program comprised educational material at diagnosis, a face-to-face educational session at completion of active treatment, and three individualized telephone counseling sessions. The control group received other education at enrollment.
resultsAt 1-month post-intervention (T2), the intervention group was more likely to be working compared to the control group after controlling working status at diagnosis (65.4% vs. 55.9%, p=0.037). Among patients who did not work at baseline, the intervention group was 1.99-times more likely to be working at T2. The mean of knowledge score was higher in the intervention group compared to the control group (7.4 vs. 6.8, p=0.029). At the 1-year follow-up, the intervention group was 65% (95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 3.48) more likely to have higher odds for having work.
conclusionThe intervention improved work-related knowledge and was effective in facilitating cancer patients' RTW.
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.