ReviewSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025
A review, evaluation and content mapping study of Australian patient-facing online pancreatobiliary cancer resources.
Review 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. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAccess to appropriate supportive care resources and services is essential to improve outcomes for cancer survivors. This study aimed to identify, evaluate and content-map Australian online supportive care resources and services for people living with pancreatobiliary cancers.
methodsA structured online search was conducted of Australian cancer organisations to identify pancreatobiliary cancer resources and services. Resources and service sites were evaluated (cost, readability, active engagement, diversity (age, sex, gender and culture), consumer voice) and content mapped against published categories of informational needs.
resultsA total of 180 unique online resources and seven service webpages were identified from 19 Australian cancer organisations. On evaluation, 99% resources and services were free to access, 44% of resources were deemed readable (year 8 reading level or below), 24% of resources demonstrated diversity and 24% of all resources and service sites included a cancer survivor voice. Information gaps were identified with topic categories such as body image and sexuality, rehabilitation, prognosis, and interpersonal and social issues.
conclusionsThere is room for improvement across existing online resources. Co-design of an online resource hub, a centralised collection of accessible and appropriate resources is warranted to maximise support and improve the health outcomes of pancreatobiliary cancers survivors and caregivers. Australian pancreatobiliary cancer survivors and caregivers would benefit from better resources that adhere to best practice standards of online support. Future research should explore ways to reduce the information seeking burden and increase the quality of information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41385087What 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.