ArticlePloS one2024
The impact of patient engagement on patient safety in care transitions after cancer treatment: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransitions of care after cancer treatment pose a major challenge for patient safety as adverse events and unplanned healthcare utilization occur frequently. At this point, patient and family engagement (PFE) is particularly valuable since patients and their families experience various challenges along this pathway, such as changing roles and recurrent needs to navigate across structural gaps between different services. However, there is currently a lack of evidence on the impact of PFE on patient safety in transitions after cancer treatment.
objectiveTo systematically review and synthesize evidence on effects of different PFE interventions on patient safety in the transition of care after cancer treatment.
methodsThis protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis follows PRISMA-P guidelines. A comprehensive database search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and APA PsycInfo. Trial registries and grey literature will be searched, forward and backward citation tracking will be performed. Trials with prospective, longitudinal, interventional study designs will be included if they evaluate PFE interventions on patient safety outcomes (primary outcomes: healthcare utilization, patient harm, adherence, patient experience; secondary: quality of life, distress); eligible studies need to survey patients with any oncological disease during or after transition following cancer treatment. Results will be synthesized narratively and meta-analytically using a random-effects model. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane RoB-2 and revised JBI critical appraisal tool. The certainty of evidence will be judged according to the GRADE approach. DISCUSSION: Robust evidence of effectiveness is needed to establish PFE interventions for patient safety in care transitions for oncological patients. This review will allow evidence-based conclusions about types and effects of different PFE interventions for transitional safety in oncology care and inform stakeholders in designing sustainable PFE activities.
trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD42024546938), OSF (doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/9XAMU).
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.