ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2024
Patient Perceptions of Care Coordination during Neoadjuvant Therapy for Gastrointestinal Cancers: A Mixed Methods Analysis.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cancer care coordination determinants of depression in head and neck cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEffective cancer care coordination (CCC) is an integral component of health care delivery and critical to achieving optimal oncologic outcomes. Neoadjuvant therapy (NT), the delivery of multimodality therapy prior to surgery, is inherently complex and multidisciplinary, but CCC during NT is poorly understood. The objective of this study was to characterize patient perceptions of CCC during NT using a mixed methods approach.
methodsThis study is a cross-sectional analysis of patients with gastrointestinal cancers receiving NT who participated in a prospective longitudinal cohort study evaluating their real-time experience using a customized smartphone application. Patients completed the Cancer Care Coordination Questionnaire for Patients (CCCQ-P), a 20-item validated measure of care coordination quality, six weeks after initiating NT. Items were scored on a 5-point Likert scale, and subsections on communication (13 questions) and navigation (7 questions) were calculated with higher scores signifying better CCC. Univariate linear regression was used to calculate the impact of fragmented care and other factors on perceived CCC. Semi-structured interviews were conducted among a convenience sample of patients (n = 5); transcribed interviews were then coded using an inductive approach.
resultsAmong 82 participants, mean age was 61 years old, 68% were male, and mean number of comorbidities was 1.68. Overall (mean 76.6 out of 100), communication subsection (48.6 out of 65), and navigation subsection (28.0 out of 35) CCCQ-P scores suggested overall positive perceptions of care coordination. Qualitative analysis of patient interviews highlighted the need for coordination among physicians before communicating the plan to patients as well as the importance of providers communicating plans in verbal and written form.
conclusionsSuccessful completion of NT requires significant care coordination between patients and healthcare professionals. Yet, in this cross-sectional analysis of patients on a prospective cohort study, patient perceptions of CCC during NT were overall positive. Future research should focus on optimizing other aspects of care delivery in order to improve outcomes of NT.
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.