Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37655693›Full record

ArticleJournal of psychosocial oncology2023

Diving deeper into distress screening implementation in oncology care.

Elizabeth A Rohan, Jennifer E Boehm, Ruvini Samarasinha, Karen Stachon, M Shayne Gallaway, Grace Huang, Diane Ng, Nanmathi Manian

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psychosocial oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Preliminary feedback from adult oncology clinic providers on a psychosocial screening tool for young adult patients with cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth A RohanDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2239-9871
Jennifer E BoehmDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Ruvini SamarasinhaDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Karen StachonAmerican College of Surgeons, Commission on Cancer, Chicago, IL.
M Shayne GallawayArizona Department of Public Health, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Grace HuangPublic Health, Westat Inc., Rockville, MD, USA.
Diane NgPublic Health, Westat Inc., Rockville, MD, USA.
Nanmathi ManianPublic Health, Westat Inc., Rockville, MD, USA.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · USWestat (United States) · USAmerican College of Surgeons · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResponding to calls for additional research that identifies effective distress screening (DS) processes, including referral practices subsequent to screening and receipt of recommended care, we engaged in qualitative research as part of a larger (mixed methods) study of distress screening. This qualitative inquiry of oncology professionals across different facilities in the United States examined routine DS implementation, facilitators and challenges staff encounter with DS processes, and staff members' perceived value of DS. PARTICIPANTS AND

methodsWe conducted key informant interviews and focus groups with staff in 4 Commission on Cancer (CoC)-accredited oncology facilities (a total of 18 participants) to understand implementation of routine DS within oncology care. We used a rigorous data analysis design, including inductive and deductive approaches.

resultsRespondents believe DS enhances patient care and described ways to improve DS processes, including administering DS at multiple points throughout oncology care, using patient-administrated DS methods, and enhancing electronic health records infrastructure to better collect, record, and retrieve DS data. Respondents also identified the need for additional psychosocial staff at their facilities to provide timely psychosocial care.

conclusionsResults reinforce the value of DS in cancer care, including the importance of follow-up to screening with psychosocial oncology providers. Understanding and resolving the barriers and facilitators to implementing DS are important to ensure appropriate psychosocial care for people with cancer. Insights from oncology staff may be used to enhance the quality of DS and subsequent psychosocial care, which is an essential component of oncology care.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsStress, PsychologicalHumansMass ScreeningMedical OncologyPsycho-OncologyReferral and ConsultationUnited StatesCancercancer survivorsdistressdistress managementdistress screeningoncologypsychosocialsurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID37655693
PMCPMC10964759
OpenAlexW4386347570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.