ReviewFrontiers in oncology2026
Occupation and oncology: cancer care in Palestine.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer care in fragile and conflict-affected settings is increasingly recognized as a challenge for global oncology. This Policy and Practice Review examines cancer care in Palestine as a case study of how prolonged occupation, armed conflict, restricted mobility, fragmented governance, fiscal constraint, and limited health sovereignty interact to shape early diagnosis, treatment continuity, radiotherapy access, systemic therapy, referral pathways, and patients' rights. Rather than treating occupation as a uniform determinant of health outcomes, the manuscript advances a more defensible framework: cancer systems deteriorate where political control, poor governance, conflict, and fiscal crisis interrupt institutional continuity; conversely, health systems consolidate after conflict or occupation only when reconstruction is linked to restored civilian authority, accountable institutions, protected movement, and sustained infrastructure investment. Palestine is analyzed alongside brief historical and regional comparators, including Japan, West Germany, East Timor, Israel, and neighboring referral systems. The review highlights the absence of radiotherapy in the Gaza Strip, the late and still limited introduction of radiotherapy in the West Bank, dependence on permit-mediated referrals to East Jerusalem and regional centers, the collapse of oncology access after October 2023, and recent medicine shortages affecting cancer treatment in both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. It connects oncology disruption with patients' rights, structural violence, ecologies of war, therapeutic geographies, and health-system governance under occupation. Finally, it proposes practical actions: protected oncology referral corridors, urgent diagnostic recovery, chemotherapy and essential-medicine protection, companion-supported medical evacuation, radiotherapy reconstruction, audited cancer financing, regional mutual-aid agreements, digital oncology records, workforce support, and rights-based monitoring of delays, denials, and preventable deaths.
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.