ReviewPeerJ2022
"Double whammy": a rapid review of rural vs urban psychosocial cancer experiences and telehealth service in five countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Review in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Forward Planning: A Staffing Framework and Ratios for Psychosocial Oncology and Supportive Care Hiring Practices as Cancer Care Models Evolve.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Examining the factors associated with disabilities among hypertensive patients in India.Narra J · 2025Article
- Exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer-related distress among thoracic oncology patients at a rural cancer center.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- "Just give it to us straight!": a qualitative analysis of midwestern rural lung cancer survivors and caregivers about survivorship care experiences.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Article
- Social influence, performance expectancy, and price value as determinants of telemedicine services acceptance in Chile.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cancer is a long-term condition with biopsychosocial components. People with cancer living in rural areas can have poorer treatment outcomes and higher rates of unmet psychosocial needs than those in urban areas. Cancer, as opposed to other chronic conditions, poses a unique challenge in this current COVID-19 pandemic context, given immunocompromised states of patients and long-term survivor treatment effects. The disaggregated impact of psychosocial issues potentiated by the pandemic on rural Method: A rapid review was conducted for literature published between December 2019 and 13 August 2021. Results: Fifteen papers were included, incorporating evidence from five countries. The available literature suggests people affected by cancer living in rural areas are evidencing disproportionate psychosocial impacts of COVID-19, compounding cancer experiences. Despite its widespread and necessary use during the pandemic, telehealth was identified as an additional challenge for rural people with cancer. Conclusions: Clinicians working with rural people affected by cancer should ensure recognition of the greater risks of psychosocial concerns in their rural patients, and reduced access to health services. Whilst telehealth and other remote technologies are useful and necessary in this pandemic era, clinicians should consider whether its use benefits their rural clients or reinforces existing disparities.
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.