ArticleBMC cancer2024
The black box of the relationship between breast cancer patients and accompanying patients: the accompanied patients' point of view.
Article in BMC 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.
- Perceived Importance vs Performance in Dental Care: Exploring Patient Satisfaction Across Age, Gender, and Purchasing Power.Patient preference and adherence · 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe PAROLE-Onco program was introduced in the province of Quebec, Canada in 2019. It integrates accompanying patients (APs), i.e., people who have been affected by cancer, into the clinical team as full members. These APs use their experiential knowledge with people undergoing treatment and with clinical teams. The aim of this paper is to evaluate, within the framework of two university medical centers, the perceptions of breast cancer patients who receive support from APs, particularly in terms of their active involvement in their care trajectory.
methodsA qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews with accompanied patients was performed. Fourteen individual interviews were conducted between July and September 2021 with women presenting different profiles in terms of age, education, professional status, type of treatment, family situation, and clinical background. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis, focusing on patients' perceptions of APs' contributions and suggested improvements for accessing AP support.
resultsThree themes emerged from the semi-structured interviews: communication modalities used to connect patients with their APs, the characteristics of the support provided by APs, and the perceived effects of this support on the patients. Patients expressed a preference for telephone communication, highlighting its convenience and accessibility. The support provided by APs included emotional and informational support, neutrality, and adaptability. This relationship improved patient communication, reduced anxiety, helped regain control, and enhanced overall quality of life. The results emphasized the added value of APs in complementing the support offered by healthcare professionals. Patients noted the critical role of APs in helping them navigate the healthcare system, better understand their treatment processes, and manage their emotions. The ability of APs to provide practical advice and emotional reassurance was particularly valued. Overall, the findings underscored the significant impact of AP support on patients' experiences and highlighted areas for enhancing this service.
conclusionThis study highlights, during the care trajectory of people affected by breast cancer, APs' contribution to patients' emotional well-being because they improve, in particular, the management of emotions and communication with health professionals.
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.