ArticlePalliative medicine2026
Multi-perspective views about healthcare experiences for those with incurable head and neck cancer: A prospective, longitudinal, qualitative study.
Article in Palliative medicine, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe disease trajectory for people with incurable head and neck cancer is unpredictable. This group also has high healthcare utilisation.
aimTo explore multi-perspectives views about incurable head and neck cancer healthcare experiences over time and how best to improve care.
designA prospective, longitudinal qualitative study was conducted involving three head and neck cancer networks in Northern England. Maximum variation sampling of incurable head and neck cancer adult patients (⩾ 18 years) was conducted. Patients were invited to participate in up to three serial interviews (conducted every 4 months); caregivers could support interviews and were 'proxies' if the patient became too unwell or died. Online focus groups were conducted with healthcare professionals. Picker's 'Principles of Patient-Centred Care' informed topic guides and framework analysis.
resultsForty-nine participants (18 patients, eight caregivers and 23 healthcare professionals) were involved in 44 interviews and 4 focus groups. Participants' accounts revealed systemic variability in experiences of healthcare delivery especially in terms of medication access, caregiver preparedness and information needs. Navigating a 'fragmented' healthcare system was a key challenge, within both non-emergency and emergency situations and especially if living alone. Suggestions to improve healthcare experiences included improving clarity about key healthcare professional contacts and communication around prescribing, and diversifying means of healthcare team working.
conclusionIssues relating to variability in experiences and challenges in healthcare system navigation, including access to symptom-relieving medication, impact on patient-centred care. Consideration to accessible means of seeking advice and support as well as improving caregivers' preparedness are key priorities.
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.