ReviewSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2023
Analysis of the status and content of consultations with a Cancer Consultation and Support Centre during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Review 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCancer Consultation and Support Centres (CCSCs) in Japan have been established at designated cancer hospitals nationwide and these centres provide information and consultation support for cancer care. The purpose of this study is to analyse the status and content of consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic using consultation record data from the Cancer Consultation Support Centre (CCSC) database from January 2020 to March 2021.
methodsFirst, we examined the number and percentage of cases involving and not involving COVID-19 and compared the items of the entry forms between the groups. The comparison between the two groups suggests that the traditional consultation items used before the COVID-19 pandemic did not adequately cover the consultation content during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, we categorised the content of consultation records related to COVID-19.
resultsAs a result, the content was consolidated into 16 categories, which were appropriately captured from five different aspects.
conclusionUsing the resulting categories, we were able to create a complementary consultation entry form that could be operational during the COVID epidemic and consult consultants for the support they needed.
trial registrationNot applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37934324What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.