ArticleBMC women's health2025
Logistic and time burdens reported by gynecologic and breast cancer survivors.
Article in BMC women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Time toxicity in cancer care: a systematic review of definitions and measurement methods.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Characterizing the Objective Time Spent on Health Care Activities in Clinic and at Home for Patients With Cancer.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Accuracy of patient, care partner, and clinician health care contact day recall.The oncologist · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe assessed the effect of the time requirements of cancer care on other life activities and time burden reduction priorities among breast and gynecologic cancer survivors.
methodsA total of 224 participants with gynecologic or breast cancer from two cohort studies completed a cross-sectional survey regarding logistic and time burdens of cancer care. We compared agreement with the importance of minimizing travel time, wait time, and trips to the cancer center as well as whether cancer care visits interfered with other activities (dependent care, chores, leisure activities) by employment, education, cancer type, cancer treatment status, dependent status, rural-urban residence, and income.
resultsAbout half (108/217, 49.8%) of participants agreed minimizing time burdens was important. Some agreed that cancer care visits interfered with leisure time (31/215, 14.4%) or impacted their ability to care for dependents (17/215, 7.9% [15.9% among those with dependents, 7/44]). Retired participants, compared to working participants, less often agreed with the importance of minimizing travel time (36.5% [31/85] versus 58.0% [58/100]), trips to the cancer center (34.5% [30/87] versus 58.0% [58/100]), and wait time (35.8% [29/81] versus 56.0% [56/100]). Participants with incomes <$50,000 and those receiving maintenance treatment most often agreed that minimizing wait time was important. Those not working (and not retired or on disability) and those receiving active treatment most often agreed that care interfered with leisure activities.
conclusionsMinimizing the time needed for cancer care-related tasks matters to patients, especially to those with lower incomes, receiving treatment, and working. In-depth research among demographically diverse populations is needed to evaluate specific time use patterns within cancer care and their association with objective and subjective burden.
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.