Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37738445›Full record

ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2024

Processes for identifying caregivers and screening for caregiver and patient distress in community oncology: results from WF-1803CD.

Chandylen L Nightingale, Anna C Snavely, Laurie E McLouth, Emily V Dressler, Erin E Kent, Christian S Adonizio, Suzanne C Danhauer, Rachel Cannady, Judith O Hopkins, Heather Kehn and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Considering the caregiver in early-phase clinical trials: a review of trial protocols and consent forms.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Chandylen L NightingaleDepartment of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2275-9849
Anna C SnavelyDepartment of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Laurie E McLouthDepartment of Behavioral Science, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, KY, USA.
Emily V DresslerDepartment of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Erin E KentDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Christian S AdonizioCenter for Oncology Research and Innovation, Geisinger Health, Danville, PA, USA.
Suzanne C DanhauerDepartment of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Rachel CannadyCancer Caregiver Support, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Judith O HopkinsHematology and Oncology, Novant Health Cancer Institute, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Heather KehnMetro Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Kathryn E WeaverDepartment of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Katherine R SterbaDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina College of Medicine, Charleston, SC, USA.
Wake Forest University · USAmerican Cancer Society · USGeisinger Health System · USMedical University of South Carolina · USMetro-Minnesota Community Oncology Research Consortium · USNovant Health · USUniversity of Kentucky · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Wake Forest NCORP Research BaseUG1CA189824 · NCI · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Emily Van Meter Dressler, GLENN J LESSER · 2014 to 2026
$57.9M
MaineHealth Cancer Care Network (MHCCN) and NCORP Activities across the LifespanUG1CA239771 · NCI · MAINEHEALTH · PI Leslie Bradford, Christine Lu-Emerson · 2019 to 2026
$7.9M
NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189824NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA239771NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite their vital roles, informal caregivers of adult cancer patients are commonly overlooked in cancer care. This study describes processes for identifying cancer caregivers and processes for distress screening and management among caregivers and patients in the understudied community oncology setting.

methodsSupportive care leaders from the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program practices completed online survey questions regarding caregiver identification, caregiver and patient distress screening, and distress management strategies. We described practice group characteristics and prevalence of study outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression explored associations between practice group characteristics and caregiver identification in the electronic health record (EHR).

resultsMost (64.9%, 72 of 111) supportive care leaders reported routine identification and documentation of informal caregivers; 63.8% record this information in the EHR. Only 16% routinely screen caregivers for distress, though 92.5% screen patients. Distress management strategies for caregivers and patients are widely available, yet only 12.6% are routinely identified and screened and had at least 1 referral strategy for caregivers with distress; 90.6% are routinely screened and had at least 1 referral strategy for patients. Practices with a free-standing outpatient clinic (odds ratio [OR] = 0.29, P = .0106) and academic affiliation (OR = 0.01, P = .04) were less likely to identify and document caregivers in the EHR. However, higher oncologist volume was associated with an increased likelihood of recording caregiver information in the EHR (OR = 1.04, P = .02).

conclusionsDespite high levels of patient distress screening and management, few practices provide comprehensive caregiver engagement practices. Existing patient engagement protocols may provide a promising platform to build capacity to better address caregiver needs.

Indexed as

CaregiversNeoplasmsAdultHumansSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID37738445
PMCPMC10852602
OpenAlexW4386950818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.