Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025
Food assistance strategies for patients of an infusion clinic: a pilot randomized controlled trial (protocol number: STU-2023-0387).
Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatients with food insecurity and chronic diseases that require long durations of infusion treatment (e.g., cancer) are more likely to delay or forego treatment and have worse outcomes than food-secure patients. Our aim was to test feasibility, adherence, and exploratory effects of providing different forms of assistance on patient-reported food security, diet, and well-being.
methodsAdults receiving treatment at an infusion clinic in Texas were screened for food insecurity. Eligible patients were referred to a mixed-methods pilot RCT and received an assistance service for 3 months: pantry only referrals, pantry + 12 medically tailored meals (MTM) per month, or pantry + $75 USD payments.
resultsPatients (N = 150) were screened from January to April 2024; 54 were eligible and 45 enrolled. Thirty-nine completed (87%), two dropped out (4%), and four entered hospice (9%). Only 54% of completers used the pantry, with most only using it once (N = 12) or twice (N = 5). Of those receiving MTM, 100% received it for 1 month, 80% for 2 months, and 67% for all months. There were statistically significant improvements in perceived diet quality over time, but no interaction by group. There were increases in fruit and vegetable consumption among those receiving MTM and non-significant decreases in other groups. Well-being increased among all but was not significant. Food security improved in pantry only and MTM but slightly decreased in the payment group.
conclusionThe study was feasible, but adherence to monthly pantry appointments was low. Future studies could explore whether there is greater adherence with co-located pantries and greater benefit from longer-term support or larger quantities of food and/or payments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.