ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
A multi‑country evaluation of healthcare professionals' experiences with the PanCareFollowUp training package to implement person-centred care in childhood cancer survivorship care: A PanCareFollowUp study.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSurvivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer face lifelong risks of treatment-related late effects, emphasizing the need for innovative, person-centred survivorship care. The PanCareFollowUp (PCFU) Care intervention, based on person-centred care (PCC), prioritizes survivors' values and needs. This paper describes the evaluation of experiences of healthcare professionals' (HCPs) and supporting staff's experiences with the training package that was developed for implementation of PCC in the PCFU Care.
methodsTo support PCC delivery, a training package, including a training presentation with voice-over and a workshop, was developed. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) and supporting staff from four European survivorship clinics evaluated the training package through questionnaires measuring readiness to apply PCC, knowledge, confidence, perceived utility, and tool-related experiences.
resultsEighteen HCPs evaluated the training presentation. Readiness to apply PCC increased from 68% pre-training to 89% post-training, while confidence declined from 78% to 68%. Most participants reported improved knowledge, with 94% indicating at least some increase. Frameworks such as Ekman's pillars, the seven steps for a PCC consultation, and shared decision-making questions were rated highly useful. Twenty-eight HCPs evaluated the workshop; 82% found it useful and 82% reported an overall favourable impression. Participants valued open discussion, multidisciplinary perspectives, and survivor involvement. The workshop's short duration and more broadly, limited time, staff shortages, and digital infrastructure were identified as barriers to PCC implementation.
conclusionThis multi-country evaluation shows that even brief PCC training can enhance HCPs' readiness to deliver person-centred survivorship care. The findings highlight both the potential of concise educational interventions and the importance of delivery format and organizational context for the sustainable implementation of PCC across survivorship care settings.
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.