Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37041401›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2023

How consequences of colorectal cancer treatment are managed: a qualitative study of stakeholder experiences about supportive care and current practices.

Claudia Rutherford, Angela Ju, Bora Kim, Lisette Wiltink, Louise Acret, Kate White

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 'Everyone has their own way-there's no protocol'. An Australian qualitative study of clinician perspectives on the management of low anterior resection syndrome.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Claudia RutherfordCancer Care Research Unit (CCRU), Susan Wakil School of Nursing, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. claudia.rutherford@sydney.edu.au.
Angela JuUniversity of Sydney, Faculty Science, School of Psychology, Quality of Life Office, Sydney, Australia.
Bora KimThe Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia.
Lisette WiltinkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Louise AcretCancer Care Research Unit (CCRU), Susan Wakil School of Nursing, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Kate WhiteCancer Care Research Unit (CCRU), Susan Wakil School of Nursing, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
University of Sydney · AUCancer Council NSW · AULeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeColorectal cancer (CRC) survivors experience treatment-effects such as symptoms and functional impairments. There is limited evidence about how these are managed and what services or supports are available in the community. We aimed to identify current practice and available supports for managing consequences of treatment from clinician and CRC survivor perspectives.

methodsThis qualitative study, informed by an interpretivist constructionist paradigm, included semi-structured interviews. Clinicians with experience of treating CRC patients and adult CRC survivors were recruited across Australia. Interviews explored experiences about problems experienced after CRC treatment and how these were managed. Data collection and analysis, using thematic analysis, was iterative whereby emergent themes during analysis were incorporated into subsequent interviews.

resultsWe interviewed 16 clinicians and 18 survivors. Survivors experienced a range of consequences of treatment amendable to support including allied health, information, and self-management. Barriers to support access included clinicians' worry about patient out-of-pocket expenses, long waitlists, lack of awareness about existing supports, and perception no therapeutic options were available. Healthcare professionals with expertise in CRC were often difficult to identify outside of cancer settings. Survivorship care could be improved with individualised timely information and identification of pathways to access healthcare providers with expertise in managing consequences of CRC treatment within primary care.

conclusionsTo improve CRC survivor lives posttreatment, routine assessment of consequences of treatment, individualised care planning involving relevant healthcare professionals, access to supportive care when needed, and improved information provision and engagement of a range of health professionals in follow-up care are needed.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsColorectal NeoplasmsAdultHumansQualitative ResearchSurvivorsSurvivorshipBowel cancerQualitative studySurvivorshipSymptomsTreatment effects

Identifiers

PMID37041401
PMCPMC10090022
OpenAlexW4364374292

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.