Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38872460›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2024

'I Do It All Alone': The Burdens and Benefits of Being Diagnosed With, and Treated for, Colorectal Cancer During the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Christina M Dobson, Jennifer Deane, Beth Osborne, Vera Araújo-Soares, Colin J Rees, Lorraine Angell, Linda Sharp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Christina M DobsonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3056-9877
Jennifer DeanePopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.
Beth OsbornePopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.
Vera Araújo-SoaresCenter for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health (CPD), Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany.
Colin J ReesPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.
Lorraine AngellIndependent Lay Researcher, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Linda SharpPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.

Funding

British Academy COV19\200122
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Covid-19 pandemic dramatically altered the way cancer care services were accessed and delivered, including for colorectal cancer (CRC). In the United Kingdom, patients were discouraged from presenting in primary care, many consultations took place remotely, investigative procedures and screening programmes were temporarily suspended, and fewer operations and treatments were delivered. People had to face the practical consequences of having cancer during a pandemic and navigate never before seen pathways, often alone. We examined the experience of being diagnosed and treated for CRC during the pandemic, and the implications of this on people's cancer journeys.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were undertaken with people diagnosed with CRC during the Covid-19 pandemic (January 2020-May 2021), in the North East of England. An iterative topic guide was used during interviews, which took place remotely (telephone or Zoom), were audio recorded, pseudo-anonymised and transcribed. Initial transcripts were independently coded by two researchers, and a code 'bank' developed for application across transcripts. Development of themes and overarching analytical constructs was undertaken collaboratively by the research team.

resultsInterviews were conducted with 19 participants, analysed and four key themes identified: (1) The relative threats of Covid-19 and Cancer were not comparable, with cancer seen as posing a far greater risk than Covid-19; (2) Remote consultations were problematic, affecting patients' abilities to build rapport and trust with clinicians, assess nonverbal communication, and feel able to disclose, comprehend and retain information; (3) Stoma follow-up care was seen to be lacking, with long wait times for stoma reversal experienced by some; Finally, (4) Being alone during consultations negatively impacted some peoples' abilities to absorb information, and left them without the support of loved ones at an emotionally vulnerable time. However, some participants preferred being alone at certain points in their pathways, including receiving a diagnosis, and most frequently when receiving in-patient treatment.

conclusionBeing alone brought unexpected benefits, absolving people from undertaking emotions work for others, and instead focus on their recovery, however, remote consultations negatively impacted patients' experiences. This study highlights the complex benefits and burdens of pandemic-located cancer journeys, including how these shifted at different points across cancer pathways. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Lorraine Angell, a cancer survivor, has been central to this study from idea conception, contributing to: development of study focus and design; securing funding; production of patient-facing materials; development of interview topic guides; analysis and interpretation of data; and drafting of key findings and manuscripts.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsCOVID-19AgedEnglandFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2United Kingdomcancer diagnosiscancer pathwayscancer survivalcolorectal cancerCovid‐19interviewsliminality

Identifiers

PMID38872460
PMCPMC11176574

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.