ReviewCancers2025
Addressing Akrasia in Childhood, Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors: Implications for Long-Term Follow-Up and Preventive Health Interventions.
Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChildhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors (CAYACS) face significant long-term health risks, yet adherence to long-term follow-up (LTFU) care remains inconsistent. This study explores the concept of akrasia (i.e., acting against one's better judgment by engaging in behaviors known to be harmful or counterproductive) to understand the psychological, cognitive, and systemic barriers influencing survivor engagement in LTFU.
methodUsing an ethical reflection approach based on a literature review, we discussed survivor experiences, behavioral science insights, and ethical principles to identify solutions that balance patient autonomy with supportive interventions. A narrative approach was used to summarize the key points discussed during the ethics reflection group meetings.
resultsOur findings highlight key barriers such as trauma, avoidance behaviors, and cognitive constraints that contribute to non-adherence. Strategies such as shared decision-making, digital health tools, and nudge-based interventions are proposed to enhance survivor engagement. Ethical considerations emphasize the need for personalized and flexible care approaches that respect survivor agency while mitigating obstacles to adherence.
conclusionsAddressing akrasia through ethical and behavioral frameworks could improve LTFU adherence, ultimately enhancing survivorship care and long-term health outcomes.
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.