ArticlePsycho-oncology2025
Contextual Adaptation of a Complex Intervention for the Management of Cancer Pain in Oncology Outpatient Services: A Case Study Example of Applying the ADAPT Guidelines.
Article in Psycho-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adapting a brief mindful breathing intervention for self-management of distress in advanced cancer patients: the RESOLVE-i study.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesStandardising pain assessment in oncology outpatient services (OOS) leads to improvements in patients' pain and quality of life. The Edinburgh Pain Assessment Tool (EPAT) is a standardised cancer pain management tool that has been implemented on inpatient oncology wards (the original setting). Routine use of EPAT reduced post-surgical pain in cancer patients (the original scenario) and led to more appropriate analgesic prescribing. We describe here a case study of adapting the EPAT intervention for use in tertiary OOS in the United Kingdom (UK) National Health Services (NHS), using the ADAPT guidelines.
methodsThe adaptation process followed Moore et al.'s ADAPT guidance: Step 1: We assessed rationale for adapting EPAT by reviewing existing literature of pain management in OOS. Step 2: Semi-structured interviews with 20-healthcare professionals (HCPs) to understand current practice and how the intervention might fit the new context (OOS). Step 3: Identified the 'core' and 'peripheral' components of EPAT, undertook four co-design workshops with 7-HCPs to reconfigure EPAT to fit OOS (adapted version is referred to as EPAT+). Four HCPs trialled the EPAT+ intervention in practice to refine the intervention.
resultsCombining qualitative data from interviews with feedback from the co-design workshops and preliminary testing the prototype intervention highlighted several key adaptation goals for EPAT+. These included: (1) reduce length/time to complete EPAT+ due to time constraints in outpatient appointments, (2) the importance of pain re-assessment and using EPAT to facilitate patients to self-monitor their pain at home, and (3) the creation of new peripheral components to support communication with primary care providers.
conclusionsUsing a theoretical driven conceptual guidance provided important learning on how to adapt an existing cancer pain management tool to a new setting (OOS). The result is a novel complex theory- and evidence-based intervention that will be formally tested in a cluster randomised pilot trial.
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.