Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39088088›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024

The association of cognitive coping style with patient preferences in a patient-led follow-up study among colorectal cancer survivors.

Kelly R Voigt, Lissa Wullaert, M H Elise van Driel, Max Goudberg, Pascal G Doornebosch, Jennifer M J Schreinemakers, Maria Verseveld, Koen C M J Peeters, Cornelis Verhoef, Olga Husson and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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

11 authors.

Kelly R VoigtDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Netherlands. k.voigt@erasmusmc.nl.
Lissa WullaertDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
M H Elise van DrielDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Max GoudbergDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Pascal G DoorneboschDepartment of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel,, The Netherlands.
Jennifer M J SchreinemakersDepartment of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands.
Maria VerseveldDepartment of Surgery, Franciscus Gasthuis, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Koen C M J PeetersDepartment of Surgery, Leiden Universitair Medisch Centrum, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Cornelis VerhoefDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Olga HussonDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Dirk J GrünhagenDepartment of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Netherlands. d.grunhagen@erasmusmc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAmidst the rising number of cancer survivors and personnel shortages, optimisation of follow-up strategies is imperative, especially since intensive follow-up does not lead to survival benefits. Understanding patient preferences and identifying the associated patient profiles is crucial. Coping style may be a key determinant in achieving this. Our study aims to evaluate preferences, identify coping styles and their associated factors, and explore the association between coping style and patients' preferences in colorectal cancer (CRC) follow-up.

methodsIn a prospective multicentre implementation study, patients completed the Threatening Medical Situations Inventory (TMSI) to determine their coping style. Simultaneously patients choose their follow-up preferences for the CRC trajectory regarding frequency of tumour marker determination, location of blood sampling, and manner of contact.

resultsA total of 188 patients completed the TMSI questionnaire after inclusion. A more intensive follow-up was preferred by 71.5% of patients. Of all patients, 52.0% had a coping style classified as 'blunting' and 34.0% as 'monitoring'. Variables such as a younger age, female gender, higher educational level, and lower ASA scores were associated with having higher monitoring scores. However, there were no significant associations between follow-up preferences and patients' coping styles.

conclusionThis study suggests that none of the provided options in a patient-led follow-up are unsuitable for patients who underwent curative surgery for primary CRC, based on coping style determined at baseline. Low-intensity surveillance after curative resection of CRC may, therefore, be suitable for a wide range of patients independent of coping styles.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalCancer SurvivorsColorectal NeoplasmsPatient PreferenceAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCognitionCoping SkillsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesColorectal cancerCoping styleFollow-upPersonalised care

Identifiers

PMID39088088
PMCPMC11294378

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.