Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39463701›Full record

ArticleJournal of psychosocial oncology research and practice

The Role of Peer Support and Patient Navigation for Empowerment in Breast Cancer Survivors: Implications for Community Cancer Control.

Marcelo M Sleiman, Mary Rose Yockel, Adina Fleischmann, Elana Silber, Mingqian Liu, Olivia Young, Sahana Arumani, Kenneth P Tercyak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psychosocial oncology research and practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Application of patient navigation programs across the entire continuum of breast cancer care: a GRADE-assessed systematic review with meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Marcelo M SleimanLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Washington DC, 20007, USA.
Mary Rose YockelLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Washington DC, 20007, USA.
Adina FleischmannSharsheret, 1086 Teaneck Road, Suite 2G, Teaneck, NJ, 07666, USA.
Elana SilberSharsheret, 1086 Teaneck Road, Suite 2G, Teaneck, NJ, 07666, USA.
Mingqian LiuLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Washington DC, 20007, USA.
Olivia YoungLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Washington DC, 20007, USA.
Sahana ArumaniLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Washington DC, 20007, USA.
Kenneth P TercyakLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Washington DC, 20007, USA.

Funding

Tissue Culture Shared ResourceP30CA051008 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI Louis M Weiner · 1990 to 2026
$71.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA051008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Community-based organizations (CBO) offer support, including patient navigation (PN), to women at-risk for (e.g., those with Methods: As part of a quality improvement initiative (N=2,247) focused on PN, care satisfaction, peer support, and quality of life (QoL), we conducted a secondary analysis of a CBO care delivery model on women's empowerment. Results: Under CBO-led cancer control, empowerment was high: most survivors felt confident in (71.2%) and knowledgeable about (66.4%) managing their care. Perceived care quality was also high (91%): it was recommendable to others (93.9%), helpful (92.7%), informative (92.6%), timely (92.2%), reliable (91.5%), supportive (91.3%), and effective (88.7%). Regarding CBO care satisfaction, survivors felt supported by abundant resources (92.8%) and programs (91.2%), understood (92.0%), and helped (91.6%). Peer support (offered to >25%) demonstrated high engagement (>85%). Regarding QoL, 25.3% were in fair/poor health and 25.6% endorsed frequent mental distress (M=7.2 physically unhealthy days, M=7.8 mentally unhealthy days, and M=6.4 activity-limited days within the past month). Disparities in empowerment were observed as a function of survivors' QoL: lowest among those with more frequent mental distress (t=-2.13, p<.05), mentally unhealthy days (r=-.083, p<.05), and activity-limited days (r=-.058, p<.05)). These burdens may have influenced survivors' feelings of empowerment, especially among those without peer support (t=3.77, p<.001), who downgraded the quality of PN (t=.60, p<.01), and were least satisfied with CBO cancer control (t=.57, p<.01). In a multivariable model adjusting for mental distress, both perceived PN quality (B=.16, SE=.01, p<.001) and peer support (B=.24, SE=.13, p=.05) were positively associated with empowerment: survivors who rated their PN higher, and offered peer support, felt more empowered. Conclusions: CBO cancer control can uplift most survivors: addressing socially determined disparities, through programs such as peer support, may enhance their effectiveness and particularly among those with poor mental health.

Indexed as

Breast CancerCommunity InterventionDisparitiesSurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID39463701
PMCPMC11507469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.