Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39672587›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Are there opportunities to improve care as patients transition through the cancer care continuum? A scoping review.

Jaling Kersen, Stefan Kurbatfinski, Abigail Thomas, Seremi Ibadin, Areej Hezam, Diane Lorenzetti, Shamir Chandarana, Joseph C Dort, Khara M Sauro

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 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

9 authors.

Jaling KersenDepartment Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Stefan KurbatfinskiDepartment Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Abigail ThomasDepartment Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Seremi IbadinDepartment of Surgery, Community Health Sciences, and Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calagary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Areej HezamDepartment Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Diane LorenzettiDepartment Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8423-3458
Shamir ChandaranaDepartment of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Joseph C DortDepartment of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Khara M SauroDepartment of Surgery, Community Health Sciences, and Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calagary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada kmsauro@ucalgary.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-7658-4351

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePatients with cancer experience many Transitions in Care (TiC), occurring when a patient's care transfers between healthcare providers or institutions/settings. Among other patient populations, TiC are associated with medical errors, patient dissatisfaction and elevated healthcare use and expenditure. However, our understanding of TiC among patients with cancer is lacking.

objectiveTo map and characterise evidence about TiC among patients with cancer.

participantsAdult patients with cancer at any stage in the cancer continuum.

interventionEvidence sources exploring TiC among patients with cancer were eligible. OUTCOME: Evidence sources exploring TiC among patients with cancer using any outcome were eligible.

settingAny setting where a patient with cancer received care.

designThis scoping review included any study describing TiC among patients with cancer with no restrictions on study design, publication type, publication date or language. Evidence sources, identified by searching six databases using search terms for the population and TiC, were included if they described TiC. Two independent reviewers screened titles/abstracts and full texts for eligibility and completed data abstraction. Quantitative data were summarised using descriptive statistics and qualitative data were synthesised using thematic analysis.

resultsThis scoping review identified 801 evidence sources examining TiC among patients with cancer. Most evidence sources focused on the TiC between diagnosis and treatment and breast or colorectal cancer. Six themes emerged from the qualitative evidence sources: the transfer of information, emotional impacts of TiC, continuity of care, patient-related factors, healthcare provider-related factors and healthcare system-related factors. Interventions intended to improve TiC among patients with cancer were developed, implemented or reviewed in 163 evidence sources.

conclusionWhile there is a large body of research related to TiC among patients with cancer, there remains a gap in our understanding of several TiC and certain types of cancer, suggesting the need for additional evidence exploring these areas.

Indexed as

Continuity of Patient CareNeoplasmsHumansPatient SatisfactionPatient TransferQuality ImprovementONCOLOGYOrganisation of health servicesQuality in health care

Identifiers

PMID39672587
PMCPMC11647354

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.