ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2024
A multi-centre survey of New Zealand cancer patients' preferences for radiation treatment information.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatients undergoing radiation therapy have a diverse range of information needs, however, there is a lack of data specific to the needs of New Zealand patients. This cross-sectional survey captured New Zealand cancer patients' preferences for radiation treatment information. Preferences were assessed regarding the scope of information needs and the satisfaction with which these needs were being met.
methodsA custom survey was offered to 275 eligible patients undergoing radiation treatment at six of 10 departments across New Zealand over a 2-day period. The survey captured patient demographics as well as information needs and satisfaction across five distinct domains using Likert scales and one free-text question. Responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and directed content analysis.
resultsOver 80% of participants rated all information domains as extremely or very important. Over 90% of participants were extremely satisfied or very well satisfied in four of the five domains. Information on what happens after radiation treatment had the lowest satisfaction at 78%. No demographic subcategories were clearly associated with differences in information needs or satisfaction. 59% of participants indicated their willingness to engage in online education. The qualitative analysis strongly corroborated the quantitative results.
conclusionThe New Zealand cancer patients surveyed in this study demonstrated high levels of importance and satisfaction with the information provided during radiation treatment. Information on what happens after completing radiation treatment had the lowest satisfaction. These findings support further exploration of New Zealand cancer patients' information needs following radiation treatment as well as strategies to address them.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.