Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39673099›Full record

ArticleWomen's health (London, England)

Guidelines unmet: Assessing gaps in breast cancer survivorship care.

Dana Pearl, Anna N Wilkinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Women's health (London, England). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Dana PearlDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0009-1191-2105
Anna N WilkinsonDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5422-8428

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Canada, after completing their treatment at oncology centers in tertiary care facilities, most breast cancer patients are discharged and receive survivorship care from primary care providers (PCPs). Evidence-based guidelines exist to inform appropriate care for breast cancer survivor follow-up.

objectivesThis study analyzed the concordance of breast cancer survivorship follow-up care by PCPs with recommended guidelines at an academic Family Health Team (FHT) in Ottawa.

designRetrospective chart review of electronic medical records of rostered patients from FHT.

methodsData was extracted from the charts of 60 breast cancer survivors. Concordance of breast cancer survivorship care by PCPs with evidence-based guidelines was established in three key survivorship domains: surveillance for recurrence or new cancers, management of treatment side effects and preventative health.

resultsPCPs provide care concordant with guidelines only 20% of the time, with areas such as preventative care at 86.7% concordance far better than management of side effects at 58.3% and oncological surveillance at 38.3%. Care did not significantly differ by age at diagnosis.

conclusionThese results highlight gaps in the current survivorship care delivery and function as a baseline for comparative analyses for future interventions to optimize survivorship follow-up care.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCancer SurvivorsSurvivorshipAdultAftercareAgedCanadaContinuity of Patient CareFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansMiddle AgedPractice Guidelines as TopicPrimary Health CareRetrospective Studiesbreast cancerprimary caresurvivorshipsurvivorship care plan

Identifiers

PMID39673099
PMCPMC11645769

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.