Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39482591›Full record

ReviewBMC cancer2024

Cancer care treatment attrition in adults: Measurement approaches and inequities in patient dropout rates - a rapid review.

Jenny Shand, Elizabeth Stovold, Lucy Goulding, Kate Cheema

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Jenny ShandUniversity College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK. j.shand@ucl.ac.uk.
Elizabeth StovoldUCLPartners, 170 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7HA, UK.
Lucy GouldingUCLPartners, 170 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7HA, UK.
Kate CheemaUCLPartners, 170 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7HA, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer treatment attrition refers to the discontinuation of prescribed cancer therapies before completion. It can significantly impact patient outcomes and cancer survival rates making it a critical concern. There is growing evidence on inequalities in cancer care, the avoidable systematic differences in the health of different groups of people. Understanding the extent of treatment attrition, why it happens, for whom, and associated inequalities may improve cancer care delivery and patient outcomes.

methodsA rapid review was conducted to identify existing evidence on measures of cancer treatment attrition, definitions, reasons for attrition and potential inequalities. The review followed a systematic approach but with abbreviated processes to facilitate quicker evidence synthesis. Searches were restricted to MEDLINE and Embase databases from their inception dates to May 7, 2024. Additional searches were performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, and key grey literature from relevant organizations. Inclusion criteria were adults with any type of cancer undergoing treatment, with studies reporting quantitative or qualitative data on treatment attrition conducted outside of clinical trials. Exclusion criteria included studies on children or adolescents, clinical trials, non-English publications, and various non-research article types. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed using standardized tools, and studies were synthesized narratively.

resultsThe search retrieved 1,353 references, with 40 studies meeting inclusion criteria. Most studies were retrospective. Studies covered various cancer types and treatments, reporting measures of attrition and reasons for treatment drop-out. Factors influencing attrition included disease progression, death, clinical deterioration, treatment toxicity, and socioeconomic factors such as lower income or socioeconomic disadvantage.

conclusionsThis review highlights significant variability in how treatment attrition is measured and defined, and suggests potential inequalities in who discontinues treatment. Standardized measures of attrition and data collection on reasons for discontinuation are essential to improve cancer care outcomes and equity. Future research should focus on developing these standardized metrics and exploring interventions targeting identified disparities to support cancer patients to complete treatment and improve outcomes.

Indexed as

Healthcare DisparitiesNeoplasmsPatient DropoutsAdultHumansSocioeconomic FactorsAttrition ratesCancer treatment adherenceInequalities in healthcare

Identifiers

PMID39482591
PMCPMC11528991

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.