Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40751814›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025

Standards and practice recommendations for Telehealth in Oncology: MASCC endorsed practice recommendations developed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Y Van Sebille, L R Wishart, J L Bender

Abstract readEditorial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Y Van SebilleUniversity of South Australia, 61-68 North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia. ysabella.vansebille@unisa.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5803-3230
L R WishartSchool of Medicine & Dentistry, Griffith University, 177 Kessels Rd, Nathan, Brisbane, Qld, 4111, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9474-9121
J L BenderCancer Rehabilitation and Survivorship, Department of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth St, Toronto, ON, M5G 2C4, Canada. jackie.bender@uhn.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1501-335X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper formally endorses the Telehealth in Oncology: ASCO Standards and Practice Recommendations as a high-quality, evidence-informed framework for integrating telehealth into cancer care. Developed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in response to the rapid expansion of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic, these standards address key domains including patient selection, communication, multidisciplinary care, clinical trials, and technology infrastructure. The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC), through its Digital Health Study Group, critically appraised the ASCO Standards using the AGREE II instrument and found them methodologically sound, clearly presented, and highly applicable to practice. MASCC's endorsement highlights the standards' value in supporting patient-centred, safe, and equitable telehealth implementation globally. Recognising the need to maintain relevance amidst ongoing technological and clinical advances, MASCC and ASCO plan a joint update. This will expand stakeholder input, support international applicability, and incorporate emerging innovations to strengthen telehealth in oncology and supportive care.

Indexed as

Medical OncologyNeoplasmsTelemedicineHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicSocieties, MedicalUnited States

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.