Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39031309›Full record

SynthesisJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2026

Models of survivorship care in patients with head and neck cancer in regional, rural, and remote areas: a systematic review.

Poorva Pradhan, Ashleigh R Sharman, Carsten E Palme, Michael S Elliott, Jonathan R Clark, Rebecca L Venchiarutti

Abstract readSystematic ReviewReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Optimising ovarian cancer care: An embedded mixed methods evaluation of a national nurse-led telehealth program.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. An exploration of nursing and Allied Health Professional (AHP)-led post-treatment surveillance and survivorship care for people with head and neck cancer-a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
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

6 authors.

Poorva PradhanDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9308-5717
Ashleigh R SharmanDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
Carsten E PalmeDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
Michael S ElliottDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
Jonathan R ClarkDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
Rebecca L VenchiaruttiDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia. rebecca.venchiarutti@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6493-7933

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRural people with head and neck cancers (HNC) are likely to experience poorer health outcomes due to limited access to health services, so many benefit from models of care that account for rurality. The aim of this review was to synthesise literature on models of care in this population.

methodsStudies were identified using seven databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, Medline, and Web of Science. Studies that tested or reported a model of care in rural HNC survivors were included. Data on characteristics and outcomes of the models were synthesised according to the domains in the Cancer Survivorship Care Quality Framework, and study quality was appraised.

resultsSeventeen articles were included. Eight were randomised controlled trials (seven with a control group and one single-arm study). Three models were delivered online, nine via telehealth, and five in-person. Majority were led by nurses and allied health specialists and most addressed management of physical (n = 9) and psychosocial effects (n = 6), while only a few assessed implementation outcomes such as cost-effectiveness. None evaluated the management of chronic health conditions.

conclusionPositive outcomes were reported for domains of survivorship care that were measured; however, further evaluation of models of care for rural people with HNC is needed to assess effectiveness across all domains of care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Rural cancer survivors are a diverse population with unique needs. Alternative models of care such as shared care, or models personalised to the individual, could be considered to reduce disparities in access to care and outcomes.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsHead and Neck NeoplasmsSurvivorshipHumansRural PopulationTelemedicineCancer survivorshipHead and neck cancerModels of careNeoplasmOncologyRural health

Identifiers

PMID39031309
PMCPMC12906516

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.