Observational studyCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Evaluation of an Outpatient Consultation Model for Cancer-Related Fatigue by the Bavarian Cancer Society: Service Utilization and Patient Satisfaction.
Observational study in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 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
Abstract
backgroundCancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a common, debilitating consequence of cancer and its treatment, yet it remains frequently underrecognized and undertreated. As a result, many patients receive neither targeted assessment nor appropriate treatment recommendations. This study evaluates the utilization, intervention uptake, and patient satisfaction with a specialized CRF consultation service at 10 cancer counseling centers in Bavaria, Germany.
methodA prospective, observational, multicenter study was conducted between March 2022 and February 2024. Patients with a cancer diagnosis and clinically relevant fatigue were eligible for CRF consultation. Of the 557 patients who received a CRF consultation, 524 participated in the study, of whom 496 were clinically diagnosed with CRF; 447 completed the follow-up.
resultsAmong patients with confirmed CRF (n = 496), a shared decision-making process involving patient and clinician resulted in the selection of three evidence-based interventions in most cases (80%), most commonly physical activity (63%), energy conservation and activity management (45%), and mind-body approaches (39%). At follow-up (n = 447), 44% of the recommended interventions had been implemented either fully or to a large extent. Even for the most frequently selected interventions, implementation remained moderate (33% to 56%). Barriers to implementation-which were primarily related to health limitations, family and work commitments, and limited service availability-were reported by 87% of the patients. Despite these challenges, satisfaction with the consultation was high (mean value of 1.2 and 1.4, on a scale from 1 = very good to 6 = very poor), and patients expressed strong support for continuing the service. Suggestions for improvement included shorter waits, assistance in implementing interventions, and support with administrative procedures.
conclusionThe CRF consultation service of the Bavarian Cancer Society is a feasible, well-accepted, and patient-centered approach that addresses a major unmet need in cancer care. This model may serve as a best practice example for similar initiatives nationally and internationally. Long-term implementation in the healthcare system requires structural integration, sustainable funding, and policy recognition.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00028264.
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.