ReviewEcancermedicalscience2026
Patient-centred care: a scoping review of measures of patient centredness in healthcare in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
Review in Ecancermedicalscience, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Person- or patient centredness (PC) is increasingly recognized as a core component of high-quality healthcare and a critical pathway to achieving equitable, person-responsive cancer services. While the concept of PC has been widely adopted and measured in high-income countries, its implementation and evaluation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) remain limited and inconsistent. This scoping review maps existing research on measures of PC in LMICs, with a specific focus on cancer care. We identified 345 studies published between 2004 and 2022 that reported on PC in LMICs, of which 20 focused on cancer. Most studies were conducted in upper-middle-income countries and used cross-sectional designs. Patient satisfaction was the most commonly measured domain, followed by communication and shared decision-making. However, foundational aspects of PC - such as patient rights, coordination of care and culturally responsive services - were rarely evaluated. Only 41% of studies used validated tools, and most interventions occurred at the facility level, with few system-level evaluations. Using the Santana et al. framework, which categorizes PC domains into structure, process and outcomes, we found that structural and systemic components of PC were particularly underrepresented in LMIC research. This suggests a gap between policy ambitions and practical implementation, especially in cancer care settings where multidisciplinary coordination and patient engagement are essential. This review advances the field by systematically documenting how PC is currently measured in LMICs and identifying significant limitations in scope, equity and contextual relevance. Findings highlight the urgent need for validated, culturally adaptable tools and frameworks that reflect the realities of LMIC health systems. Addressing these gaps is essential for scaling person-centred cancer care and strengthening health systems toward universal health coverage.
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.