Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37819661›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Availability of Family Caregiver Programs in US Cancer Centers.

J Nicholas Odom, Allison Applebaum, Marie A Bakitas, Tara Bryant, Erin Currie, Kayleigh Curry, Heidi Donovan, Maria E Fernandez, Betty Ferrell, Andres Azuero and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. "The aspect of caregiving becomes incredibly complex": lived experiences of rural cancer caregiving identified through community advisory board engagement.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Caregiver health literacy in head and neck cancer and its relationship with caregiver and patient psychological distress.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. 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

18 authors.

J Nicholas OdomSchool of Nursing, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Allison ApplebaumDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Marie A BakitasSchool of Nursing, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Tara BryantViva Health Inc, Birmingham, Alabama.
Erin CurrieSchool of Nursing, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Kayleigh CurrySchool of Nursing, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Heidi DonovanSchool of Nursing, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Maria E FernandezDepartment of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston.
Betty FerrellCity of Hope, Duarte, California.
Andres AzueroSchool of Nursing, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham.
Tamryn F GrayDepartment of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Bailey A HendricksCollege of Nursing, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha.
Diane MeierMount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York.
Chandylen NightingaleDepartment of Social Sciences and Health Policy, School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Susan ReinhardAARP Public Policy Institute, Washington, DC.
Timothy S SannesUMass Memorial Cancer Center, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Katherine SterbaDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Heather M YoungBetty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California, Davis.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Family caregivers provide the majority of health care to the 18 million patients with cancer in the US. Yet despite providing complex medical and nursing care, a large proportion of caregivers report no formal support or training. In recognition of this gap, many interventions to support cancer caregivers have been developed and tested over the past 2 decades. However, there are few system-level data on whether US cancer centers have adopted and implemented these interventions. Objective: To describe and characterize the availability of family caregiver support programs in US cancer centers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional national survey study was conducted between September 1, 2021, and April 30, 2023. Participants comprised clinical and administrative staff of Commission on Cancer-accredited US cancer centers. Data analysis was performed in May and June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey questions about the availability of 11 types of family caregiver programs (eg, peer mentoring, education classes, and psychosocial programs) were developed after literature review, assessment of similar program evaluation surveys, and discussions among a 13-member national expert advisory committee. Family caregiver programs were defined as structured, planned, and coordinated groups of activities and procedures aimed at specifically supporting family caregivers as part of usual care. Survey responses were tabulated using standard descriptive statistics, including means, proportions, and frequencies. Results: Of the surveys sent to potential respondents at 971 adult cancer centers, 238 were completed (response rate, 24.5%). After nonresponse weight adjustment, most cancer centers (75.4%) had at least 1 family caregiver program; 24.6% had none. The most common program type was information and referral services (53.6%). Cancer centers with no programs were more likely to have smaller annual outpatient volumes (χ2 = 11.10; P = .011). Few centers had caregiver programs on training in medical and/or nursing tasks (21.7%), caregiver self-care (20.2%), caregiver-specific distress screening (19.3%), peer mentoring (18.9%), and children caregiving for parents (8.3%). Very few programs were developed from published evidence in a journal (8.1%). The top reason why cancer centers selected their programs was community members requesting the program (26.3%); only 12.3% of centers selected their programs based on scientific evidence. Most programs were funded by the cancer center or hospital (58.6%) or by philanthropy (42.4%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, most cancer centers had family caregiver programs; however, a quarter had none. Furthermore, the scope of programming was limited and rarely evidence based, with few centers offering caregiving education and training. These findings suggest that implementation strategies are critically needed to foster uptake of evidence-based caregiver interventions.

Indexed as

CaregiversNeoplasmsAdultChildCross-Sectional StudiesEducational StatusHumansParentsSelf Care

Identifiers

PMID37819661
PMCPMC10568368

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.