Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36759789›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2023

Evaluating patient reported outcomes and experiences in a novel proton beam clinic - challenges, activities, and outcomes of the ProtonCare project.

K Sjövall, U Langegård, P Fransson, E Nevo-Ohlsson, I Kristensen, K Ahlberg, B Johansson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. To become part of the team-patient experiences of participating in decision-making for a new treatment (proton beam therapy).Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

K SjövallFaculty of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, SE-291 88, Kristianstad, Sweden. Katarina.sjovall@hkr.se.
U LangegårdInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, Göteborg University, Box 457, SE- 405 30, Göteborg, Sweden.
P FranssonDepartment of Nursing, Umeå University, SE-90 187, Umeå, Sweden.
E Nevo-OhlssonSchool of Health Sciences, Örebro University, SE-701 82, Örebro, Sweden.
I KristensenSystemic Radiation Therapy, Lund University, SE-221 00, Lund, Sweden.
K Ahlberg *Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Göteborg University, Box 457, SE- 405 30, Göteborg, Sweden.
B Johansson *Blod- Och Tumörsjukdomar Administration, Uppsala University, SE- 51 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
University of Gothenburg · SEKristianstad University · SELund University · SEÖrebro University · SEUmeå University · SEUppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe ProtonCare Study Group (PCSG) was formed with the purpose to develop and implement a framework for evaluation of proton beam therapy (PBT) and the related care at a novel clinic (Skandionkliniken), based on patient reported data.

methodA logic model framework was used to describe the process of development and implementation of a structured plan for evaluation of PBT for all diagnoses based on patient reported data. After the mission for the project was determined, meetings with networks and stakeholders were facilitated by PCSG to identify assumptions, resources, challenges, activities, outputs, outcomes, and outcome indicators.

resultThis paper presents the challenges and accomplishments PCSG made so far. We describe required resources, activities, and accomplished results. The long-term outcomes that were outlined as a result of the process are two; 1) Improved knowledge about health outcomes of patients that are considered for PBT and 2) The findings will serve as a base for clinical decisions when patients are referred for PBT.

conclusionUsing the logical model framework proved useful in planning and managing the ProtonCare project. As a result, the work of PCSG has so far resulted in long-lasting outcomes that creates a base for future evaluation of patients' perspective in radiotherapy treatment in general and in PBT especially. Our experiences can be useful for other research groups facing similar challenges. Continuing research on patients´ perspective is a central part in ongoing and future research. Collaboration, cooperation, and coordination between research groups/networks from different disciplines are a significant part of the work aiming to determine the more precise role of PBT in future treatment options.

Indexed as

ProtonsProton TherapyHumansPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProtonsCancer nursingPatient reported outcomesProton beam therapyRadiotherapyResearch program planning

Identifiers

PMID36759789
PMCPMC9909877
OpenAlexW4319764881

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.