Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37603072›Full record

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

Supportive care interventions for men with urological cancers: a scoping review.

Mohamad M Saab, Megan McCarthy, Mike Murphy, Katarina Medved, Maria O'Malley, Richard M Bambury, Jack P Gleeson, Brendan Noonan

Open access · hybridAbstract readScoping Review
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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mohamad M SaabCatherine McAuley School of Nursing and Midwifery, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. msaab@ucc.ie.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7277-6268
Megan McCarthyCatherine McAuley School of Nursing and Midwifery, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1415-8461
Mike MurphySchool of Applied Psychology, College of Arts, Celtic Studies & Social Sciences, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8379-3813
Katarina MedvedCancer Research @UCC, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Maria O'MalleyCatherine McAuley School of Nursing and Midwifery, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0495-8588
Richard M BamburyCancer Research @UCC, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2189-6972
Jack P GleesonCancer Research @UCC, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6908-495X
Brendan NoonanCatherine McAuley School of Nursing and Midwifery, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1227-7045
University College Cork · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo identify supportive care interventions for men with urological cancers.

methodsExperimental studies conducted among men with any urological cancer were eligible for inclusion. Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, MEDLINE, APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson), SocINDEX with Full Text, ERIC, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on 6 December 2022. No database limits were applied. The included studies were methodologically appraised. A narrative synthesis of the results was conducted.

resultsThirty studies were included with 10 categories of interventions identified. Over 300 outcomes were measured, and more than 100 instruments were used. Multicomponent interventions generally led to positive changes in physiological outcomes like body mass index, as well as exercise tolerance and quality of life. This change, however, was not sustained in the long term. Cognitive-behavioural interventions significantly improved psychological symptoms but seldom physical symptoms. Telephone and web-based interventions showed great promise in improving outcomes like depression, positive affect, negative affect, perceived stress, spiritual wellbeing and fatigue. Findings from physical activity/exercise-based interventions were promising for both, physical and psychological outcomes. Rehabilitative interventions were associated with significant improvements in quality of life, urinary symptoms and psychological symptoms, albeit in the short term. Mixed results were reported for nurse-led interventions, family-based interventions and nutritional interventions.

conclusionAll but one study focused exclusively on prostate cancer. The included studies were significantly heterogeneous. Multicomponent, cognitive-behavioural, telephone and web-based, physical activity/exercise-based and rehabilitative interventions showed great promise in improving various outcomes. This improvement, however, was often short-lived.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyProstatic NeoplasmsUrologic NeoplasmsBody Mass IndexHumansMaleQuality of LifeMenNeeds assessmentNeoplasmsProstatic neoplasmsScoping reviewUrologic neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID37603072
PMCPMC10442278
OpenAlexW4386020268

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.